Azevedo v. Commissioner of Social Security
Filing
32
ORDER signed by District Judge Anthony W. Ishii on 7/2/2013 granting 30 MOTION for RECONSIDERATION; vacating 29 Order and referring motion for attorney fees to Magistrate Judge Stanley A. Boone. (Lundstrom, T)
1
IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE
EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA
2
)
)
Plaintiff,
)
)
v.
)
)
MICHAEL J. ASTRUE, Commissioner )
of Social Security,
)
)
Defendant.
)
)
____________________________________)
FRANK AZEVEDO,
3
4
5
6
7
8
1:11-CV-1341 AWI SAB
ORDER GRANTING
DEFENDANT’S MOTION FOR
RECONSIDERATION AND
VACATING ORDER
(Doc. Nos. 29, 30)
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
On March 21, 2013, the Court adopted a Findings and Recommendation and reversed and
remanded this case for an award of benefits to Plaintiff. On June 19, 2013, Plaintiff filed a
motion for attorney’s fees. On June 21, 2013, the Court signed Plaintiff’s proposed order
granting the requested fees. On July 1, 2013, Defendant filed a motion for reconsideration of the
June 21, 2013 order on the grounds of clerical mistake and that Defendant had not had an
opportunity to oppose the motion.
17
18
19
20
21
22
After reviewing the file, Defendant is correct that an error occurred. The order granting
attorney’s fees was signed in error and inadvertently. It is not the practice of the Court to grant
motions for attorney’s fees without first giving the other party an opportunity to file an
opposition. Under these circumstances, it is appropriate to grant Defendant’s motion and to
vacate the June 21, 2013 order. See Fed. R. Civ. Pro. 60(a); Blanton v. Anzalone, 813 F.2d
1574, 1577 n.2 (9th Cir. 1987).
23
24
25
26
27
Accordingly, IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that:
1.
Defendant’s motion for reconsideration (Doc. No. 30) is GRANTED;
2.
The June 21, 2013 order of the Court (Doc. No. 29) is VACATED; and
3.
Plaintiff’s motion for attorney’s fees is REFERRED to Magistrate Judge Boone.
IT IS SO ORDERED.
28
Dated:
0m8i78
July 2, 2013
SENIOR DISTRICT 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?