UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT DISTRICT OF CONNECTICUT

JOAN ROSE T.,

Plaintiff, Civil No. 3:21-cv-00567-TOF

v. November 17, 2021 KILOLO KIJAKAZI, ACTING COMMISSIONER OF SOCIAL SECURITY

Defendant.1

ORDER GRANTING COMMISSIONER’S CONSENT MOTION FOR ENTRY OF JUDGMENT WITH REVERSAL AND REMAND

On November 16, 2021, the defendant, Kilolo Kijakazi, acting Commissioner of Social Security, moved for entry of a judgment reversing the decision of the Administrative Law Judge and remanding for “further development of the record and additional administrative action.” (ECF No. 17.) The motion recited that the Commissioner has contacted counsel for the plaintiff, who consents to the relief sought in this motion. The defendant’s motion is GRANTED. Pursuant to the power of this Court to enter judgment affirming, modifying or reversing the Commissioner’s decision with remand in Social Security actions under sentence four of Section 205(g) of the Social Security Act,

(g), and in light of the parties’ evident agreement to remand this action for further administrative proceedings, the Court hereby ORDERS that the Commissioner’s decision is reversed and the case is remanded to the Commissioner for further

1 When the Plaintiff filed this action, she named the then-Commissioner of the Social Security Administration, Andrew Saul, as the defendant. (Compl., ECF No. 1.) Commissioner Saul no longer serves in that office. His successor, Acting Commissioner Kilolo Kijakazi, is automatically substituted as the defendant pursuant to Fed. R. Civ. P. 25(d). The Clerk of the Court is respectfully requested to amend the caption of the case accordingly. proceedings. See Shalala v. Schaefer,

(1993); Melkonyan v. Sullivan,

(1991). Upon remand, the Appeals Council will remand this case to an administrative law judge. The plaintiff will be given an opportunity for a new hearing and to submit additional evidence in accordance with

and 405.350. The ALJ will issue a new decision.

The clerk of the Court is directed to enter a separate judgment pursuant to Fed. R. Civ. P. 58. This is not a Recommended Ruling. The plaintiff and defendant consented to the entry of a final order and judgment by a Magistrate Judge on April 27, 2021, and April 29, 2021, respectively. (ECF Nos. 6, 7.) It is so ordered.

/s/ Thomas O. Farrish Hon. Thomas O. Farrish United States Magistrate Judge