Hopson v. Social Security Administration Commissioner
ORDER denying as premature 16 plaintiff's Motion for EAJA Attorney Fees. Signed by Honorable Erin L. Setser on October 18, 2011. (sh)
IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
WESTERN DISTRICT OF ARKANSAS
FORT SMITH DIVISION
MICHAEL E. HOPSON
CIVIL NO. 10-2080
MICHAEL J. ASTRUE, Commissioner
Social Security Administration
On June 15, 2010, Plaintiff, Michael E. Hopson, appealed the Commissioner's denial of benefits to
this Court. (Doc. 1). On May 17, 2011, Plaintiff filed a Motion to Remand for New Evidence. (Doc. 11).
On June 9, 2011, the Court, granted Plaintiff’s motion and remanded the case for further consideration
pursuant to sentence six of 42 U.S.C. § 405(g). (Doc. 15). On September 8, 2011, Plaintiff’s counsel filed
a motion for an award of $2,577.00 in attorney's fees and costs under 28 U.S.C. § 2412, the Equal Access
to Justice Act (hereinafter "EAJA"), requesting compensation for 13.00 attorney hours of work before the
Court at an hourly rate of $174.00; and 4.20 paralegal hours of work before the Court at an hourly rate of
$75.00. (Docs. 16, 17). On September 21, 2011, Defendant filed a Response objecting to the request for
attorney’s fees under the EAJA as premature, because no final Judgment had been issued in the case. (Doc.
Since there has been no determination that Plaintiff is a prevailing party in this matter and judgment
in this case has yet to be entered, the Court finds Plaintiff's counsel is not entitled to attorney's fees at this
time. See Shalala v. Schaefer, 509 U.S. 292 (1993). A claimant who obtains a "sentence six" remand is
not eligible for attorney's fees under EAJA until the results from the post-remand proceedings have been
filed with the Court and judgment entered. Id. Accordingly, Plaintiff's motion for EAJA fees is hereby
denied as premature.
IT IS SO ORDERED this 18th day of October 2011.
/s/ Erin L. Setser
HON. ERIN L. SETSER
UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE
Disclaimer: Justia Dockets & Filings provides public litigation records from the federal appellate and district courts. These filings and docket sheets should not be considered findings of fact or liability, nor do they necessarily reflect the view of Justia.
Why Is My Information Online?