Rondon v. Commissioner of Social Security
- Paul Engelmayer
- 1:25-cv-00144
- U.S. District Court · Southern District of New York
- 1
In Rondon v. Commissioner of Social Security, Judge Engelmayer reversed the Commissioner’s decision and remanded the case for further proceedings.
The plaintiff and the Commissioner of Social Security; the case must undergo further administrative proceedings and receive a new decision.
What happened
In Rondon v. Commissioner of Social Security, the court entered judgment after a stipulation and order dated June 3, 2025. The opinion does not state what issue led to the Commissioner’s decision or the parties’ reasons for agreeing to the stipulation.
The court reversed the Commissioner’s decision and sent the action back to the Commissioner for additional administrative proceedings and a new decision. The remand was made under the fourth sentence of 42 U.S.C. § 405(g).
Judge Paul Engelmayer issued the ruling on June 4, 2025. The judgment does not describe the further proceedings or the result the Commissioner must reach.
The detailed version
- Rondon v. Commissioner of Social Security · No. 1:25-cv-00144
- Paul Engelmayer
- June 4, 2025
Background
The plaintiff brought this action against the Commissioner of Social Security. The court’s judgment states that it acted for the reasons given in a stipulation and order dated June 3, 2025. The supplied judgment does not explain the underlying dispute, the Commissioner’s original decision, or the terms of the stipulation.
Ruling
The court ordered that the Commissioner’s decision be reversed. It also ordered that the action be remanded—sent back to the Commissioner—for further administrative proceedings and a new decision. The court identified the remand as one under the fourth sentence of 42 U.S.C. § 405(g), and cited Shalala v. Schaefer, 509 U.S. 292 (1993).
Disposition
The judgment reversed the Commissioner’s decision and remanded the action to the Commissioner for further administrative proceedings and a new decision. The judgment does not state what the new decision must be or otherwise describe the outcome of the underlying Social Security dispute.
Read the full 1-page opinion on CourtListener, the free public archive maintained by the Free Law Project.