Sentence Four vs Sentence Six Remands in Disability Cases

In federal court SSDI appeals, a remand sends a disability claim back to the Social Security Administration for further administrative action. The primary difference between a sentence four remand and a sentence six remand under 42 U.S.C. 405(g) is that a sentence four remand accompanies a judgment reviewing the agency decision, while a sentence six remand occurs without an immediate final judgment. A sentence six remand may follow the Commissioner's timely request or permit consideration of qualifying new evidence.

After completing the applicable administrative review process, including Appeals Council review, a claimant may seek judicial review by filing a civil action in a United States District Court under 20 CFR 404.900. A federal court may affirm, modify, or reverse the agency decision. When it identifies an error requiring additional agency action, the court may remand the claim instead of directing an immediate award of benefits.

Understanding whether a remand occurs under sentence four or sentence six affects the case timeline, court jurisdiction, and attorney-fee procedure. In 1991, the United States Supreme Court explained these remand provisions in Melkonyan v. Sullivan (501 U.S. 89). Each path operates under distinct statutory standards and produces different procedural results.

The Statutory Foundation of 42 U.S.C. 405(g)

Section 205(g) of the Social Security Act, codified at 42 U.S.C. 405(g), governs judicial review of Social Security disability claims. The statute contains eight sentences, with sentences four and six establishing the relevant remand powers of federal courts.

Sentence four states that a district court has the power to enter a judgment affirming, modifying, or reversing the decision of the Commissioner of Social Security, with or without remanding the cause for a rehearing. This provision allows a court to address errors identified through judicial review of the agency decision.

Sentence six provides that the court may, on motion of the Commissioner made for good cause before the Commissioner files an answer, remand the case for further action. It also authorizes the court to order additional evidence to be taken before the Commissioner when the claimant shows that the evidence is new and material and that good cause existed for failing to incorporate it into the prior record.

Federal courts must act within the remand authority granted by the statute. In Shalala v. Schaefer (509 U.S. 292, decided in 1993), the Supreme Court explained that Social Security remands under 42 U.S.C. 405(g) proceed through sentence four or sentence six.

Sentence Four Remands: Correcting Agency Legal Errors

A sentence four remand can occur when a federal judge reviews the administrative record and determines that the agency applied an incorrect legal standard or that its findings are not supported by substantial evidence.

Under 42 U.S.C. 405(g), substantial evidence means relevant evidence that a reasonable mind might accept as adequate to support a conclusion. A court also reviews whether the agency applied the governing legal standards. The court does not decide the disability claim from scratch or substitute its judgment for the agency merely because the record could support a different conclusion.

Common grounds for a sentence four remand include:

• Failing to address the supportability and consistency of medical opinions or prior administrative medical findings as required by 20 CFR 404.1520c.
• Improperly evaluating reported symptoms, including pain, under SSR 16-3p and 20 CFR 404.1529.
• Relying on vocational evidence that does not adequately support a finding that the claimant can perform work existing in the national economy under 20 CFR 404.1566.
• Failing to explain how the evidence supports the Residual Functional Capacity assessment under SSR 96-8p.

When a judge orders a sentence four remand, the district court enters a final judgment under Rule 58 of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure. That judgment ends the pending federal civil action, and the court ordinarily does not retain jurisdiction while the agency conducts the ordered proceedings.

Sentence Six Remands: Evaluating New and Material Evidence

A sentence six remand based on new evidence does not decide whether the agency's earlier decision was legally correct on the record then before it. Instead, it permits the agency to consider qualifying evidence that was not incorporated into the administrative record.

Under 42 U.S.C. 405(g), the evidentiary requirements for this type of sentence six remand are specific. Obtaining another medical report after an unfavorable agency decision is not, by itself, enough. The claimant must establish three elements.

First, the evidence must be new rather than merely duplicating information already in the record. Second, it must be material to the disability determination for the period the agency adjudicated. Evidence showing only a later deterioration may be relevant to a new application but may not justify reopening the period addressed by the earlier decision. Third, the claimant must show good cause for not presenting the evidence during the prior administrative proceedings. Whether these requirements are satisfied depends on the facts and the law governing the case.

Sentence six also permits the Commissioner to request a remand for good cause before filing an answer. This route does not require the court to make a substantive ruling on the merits of the agency decision.

Procedural Differences Between Sentence Four and Sentence Six

The legal distinction between these two remands determines how the federal lawsuit proceeds and when attorney-fee deadlines may arise.

Finality and Court Jurisdiction

In a sentence four remand, the district court enters a final judgment and ends the pending civil action. If the agency later issues another unfavorable final decision, the claimant generally must complete any required administrative review and file a new civil action to obtain further judicial review.

In a sentence six remand, the court retains jurisdiction and does not immediately enter a final judgment ending the case. After the remand proceedings conclude, 42 U.S.C. 405(g) requires the Commissioner to return to the court with any modified or additional findings and the record of the additional proceedings. The court can then complete its review and enter judgment.

Equal Access to Justice Act (EAJA) Attorney Fees

The Equal Access to Justice Act, codified at 28 U.S.C. 2412, may allow a prevailing party to recover reasonable attorney fees when the government's position was not substantially justified and the other statutory requirements are met. The timing of an EAJA application depends on the type of remand.

Because a sentence four remand is accompanied by a final judgment, Shalala v. Schaefer recognizes the claimant as a prevailing party for EAJA purposes. Under the federal deadlines in effect in 2026, the 30-day EAJA filing period begins after the judgment becomes final and no longer appealable; when the federal government is a party, the ordinary appeal period is 60 days.

A sentence six remand does not make the claimant a prevailing party when the remand order is entered because the court has not yet entered a final judgment. If the post-remand proceedings produce a favorable result, the Commissioner returns to court and the court enters judgment. The EAJA filing period is then calculated from the point when that judgment becomes final and no longer appealable.

What Happens at the Hearing Office on Remand

When a federal court remands a case, the Social Security Administration must act consistently with the court's order. Under 20 CFR 404.983, the Appeals Council, acting for the Commissioner, may make a decision, remand the case to an administrative law judge, or dismiss the proceedings when dismissal is appropriate.

Following a sentence four remand for additional proceedings, the agency determines the steps necessary to comply with the judgment. An administrative law judge may hold another hearing, receive updated evidence, reconsider particular findings, and issue a new decision. The scope of those proceedings depends on the court's order and the Appeals Council's remand instructions. A remand does not itself guarantee approval or require assignment to a different administrative law judge.

Following a sentence six remand based on new evidence, the agency takes the additional evidence required by the court and reconsiders the claim as directed. Under 20 CFR 404.984, an administrative law judge's post-remand decision generally becomes the Commissioner's final decision unless the Appeals Council assumes jurisdiction under the procedures stated in that regulation. Under 20 CFR 404.985, the agency applies controlling circuit court law in court-remand proceedings as provided by that regulation.

Frequently Asked Questions

What is the primary difference between a sentence four and sentence six remand?
Under 42 U.S.C. 405(g), a sentence four remand accompanies a final judgment reviewing the agency decision. A sentence six remand sends the case back without an immediate final judgment, either on the Commissioner's timely request or for consideration of new and material evidence when the statutory requirements are met.

Does a sentence four remand mean that my SSDI benefits are automatically approved?
No. Unless the court directs an award, a sentence four remand generally returns the claim to the Social Security Administration for additional proceedings consistent with the court's order.

What requirements must be met to obtain a sentence six remand for new evidence?
Under 42 U.S.C. 405(g), you must show that the evidence is new, that it is material to your condition during the period adjudicated by the agency, and that good cause existed for failing to present it during earlier administrative proceedings.

This article provides general information about Social Security Disability Insurance rules and is not legal advice. Program regulations, appeal procedures, and administrative guidelines may change over time. The procedural deadlines discussed here reflect rules applicable in 2026. Consult a qualified representative or contact the Social Security Administration directly for guidance regarding your individual claim.