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

BRYAN WILLIAMS, ) ) Plaintiff, ) ) vs. ) Case No. 21-cv-117-RJD1 ) COMMISSIONER of SOCIAL SECURITY, ) ) Defendant. )

MEMORANDUM AND ORDER

DALY, Magistrate Judge:

This matter comes before the Court on the parties’ Joint Motion to Remand to the Commissioner. (Doc. 24). 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). For good cause shown, the parties’ Joint Motion to Remand (Doc. 24) is GRANTED. The parties agree that, on remand, the ALJ will offer Plaintiff the opportunity for a hearing, evaluate Plaintiff’s residual functional capacity, seek vocational expert testimony regarding whether Plaintiff could perform his past relevant work or work that exists in the national economy, and issue a new decision. Plaintiff applied for benefits in August 2016. (Tr. 386). While recognizing

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

(c). Doc. 9. that the agency has a full docket, the Court urges the Commissioner to expedite this case on remand. The final decision of the Commissioner of Social Security denying Plaintiff’s application for social security 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. All pending motions

are moot.

IT IS SO ORDERED.

DATED: October 5, 2021.

s/Reona J. Daly REONA J. DALY UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE