1
FILED IN THE
2 U.S. DISTRICT COURT
EASTERN DISTRICT OF WASHINGTON
3 Mar 20, 2026
4
SEAN F. MCAVOY, CLERK
5
6
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
7 EASTERN DISTRICT OF WASHINGTON
8
BRANDI G., No. 1:25-CV-03153-JAG
9
Plaintiff,
10
vs. ORDER GRANTING
11 STIPULATED REMAND
FRANK BISIGNANO, Commissioner of
12
Social Security,1
13
Defendant.
14
15
Before the court is the parties’ Stipulated Motion to Remand. ECF No. 18.
16 After considering the motion, file, and proposed order, it is hereby ORDERED:
17 1. The parties’ Stipulated Motion to Remand, ECF No. 18, is
18 GRANTED.
2. Based on the stipulation of the parties, the above-captioned case is
19
REVERSED and REMANDED. This Court hereby reverses the Commissioner’s
20
decision under sentence four of 42 U.S.C. § 405(g) with a remand of the case to the
21
22
1 Pursuant to Rule 25(d) of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure, Frank Bisignano
23
is substituted as the Defendant in this suit.
24
Commissioner for further administrative proceedings. See Melkonyan v. Sullivan,
501 U.S. 89 (1991).
3 Upon remand, the Administrative Law Judge will be directed to offer
4 || Plaintiff the opportunity for a hearing; further consider the medical source opinions
5 prior administrative medical findings pursuant to the provisions of 20 C.F.R.
6 || § 404.1520c; take any other action necessary to complete the administrative
7 record; and issue a new decision.
3. All other pending motions are DENIED AS MOOT.
4. Judgment shall be entered for Plaintiff.
° 5. Upon proper consideration, the Court will consider Plaintiff's
10 application for reasonable attorney’s fees and costs pursuant to the Equal Access to
11 || Justice Act, 28 U.S.C. § 2412(d).
12 The District Court Executive is directed to enter this Order, enter judgment
13 ||in favor of the Plaintiff, provide copies of the Order and Judgment to counsel, and
14 CLOSE THIS FILE.
15 DATED March 20, 2026.
| a Okla
Arne
18 UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE
19
20
21
22
23
24
ORDER GRANTING STIPULATED REMAND - 2
Not legal advice. These patterns come from public court records, not ratings of judges as people. They may reflect the types of cases a judge handles, local procedures or other factors, and they do not account for the facts of any individual case. Past patterns do not predict future rulings. Records can be incomplete, months behind current activity, or matched to the wrong person; sealed and confidential cases are not included. Use this as one piece of information, never the sole basis for legal strategy or a recusal motion. Full disclaimer: https://judgefinder.io/legal/disclaimer Read the full disclaimer.