IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF ILLINOIS

JOSHUA W. HUBBARD, ) ) Plaintiff, ) ) vs. ) Civil No. 19-cv-952-MAB ) COMMISSIONER of SOCIAL ) SECURITY, ) ) Defendant. )

MEMORANDUM AND ORDER

BEATTY, Magistrate Judge:

Before the Court is the parties’ Agreed Motion to Remand to the Commissioner. 1 (Doc. 33). The parties ask that this case be remanded for further proceedings pursuant to sentence four of

(g). A sentence four remand (as opposed to a sentence six remand) depends upon a finding of error, and is itself a final, appealable order. See Melkonyan v. Sullivan,

(1991); Perlman v. Swiss Bank Corporation Comprehensive Disability Protection Plan,

(7th Cir. 1999). Upon a sentence four remand, judgment should be entered in favor of Plaintiff. Shalala v. Schaefer,

(1993). The parties agree that, upon remand, “The ALJ will: (1) further evaluate the medical evidence; (2) reassess Plaintiff’s residual functional capacity; (3) if necessary,

1 This case was assigned to the undersigned for final disposition upon consent of the parties pursuant to

(c). See, Docs. 11, 22. obtain supplemental evidence from a vocational expert; and (4) issue a new decision.” (Doc. 33, p. 1).

For good cause shown, the parties’ Agreed Motion to Remand to the Commissioner (Doc. 33) is GRANTED. The final decision of the Commissioner of Social Security denying Plaintiff’s application for social security disability benefits is REVERSED and REMANDED to the Commissioner for rehearing and reconsideration of the evidence, pursuant to sentence four of

(g).

The Clerk of Court is directed to enter judgment in favor of Plaintiff.

IT IS SO ORDERED.

DATED: September 25, 2020

/s/ Mark A. Beatty MARK A. BEATTY United States Magistrate Judge