Thomas A Michalski v. Carolyn Colvin

Filing 28

ORDER by Judge Edward M. Chen Granting 24 Plaintiff's Counsel's Petition for Approval of Attorney Fees. (emcsec, COURT STAFF) (Filed on 10/24/2017)

1
2
3
4

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

5

NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

6
7

THOMAS A. MICHALSKI,
Plaintiff,

8
9
10

v.
CAROLYN COLVIN,
Defendant.

ORDER GRANTING PLAINTIFF’S
COUNSEL’S PETITION FOR
APPROVAL OF ATTORNEY FEES, 42
U.S.C. § 406(B)
Docket No. 24

12
For the Northern District of California

United States District Court

11

Case No. 15-cv-04483-EMC

13

The Court has reviewed Ms. Trompeter’s fee motion and the government’s response

14

thereto. The Court finds that the fee request is reasonable. The Court does not find that Ms.

15

Trompeter engaged in any unnecessary delay. Also, the Court heavily takes into account that Ms.

16

Trompeter is foregoing any fees incurred at the agency level on remand after the summary

17

judgment order issued. Given the additional time spent by Ms. Trompeter on remand, it is likely

18

that the effective hourly rate being sought here is comparable to the effective hourly rate awarded

19

by Judge Seeborg in Slotnick v. Colvin, No. C-13-2283 RS (Docket No. 26) (order, filed on

20

August 5, 2016). The Court notes, however, that it does not agree with Ms. Trompeter’s position

21

that an effective hourly rate should be calculated after deducting any EAJA award. See Stewart v.

22

Astrue, No. C 05-2317 PVT, 2010 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 35936, at *3 (N.D. Cal. Mar. 15, 2010)

23

(“Plaintiff’s counsel’s suggestion that the court should base its reasonableness determination on

24

just $ 11,765.89 of the award [i.e., taking out the EAJA award] ignores the reality of how much

25

money he will actually have received for the court case.”). In any event, given Ms. Trompeter’s

26

representation that she will not seek additional fees incurred at the agency level, the 25%

27

contingency is reasonable.

28

1

Accordingly, the fee motion is hereby GRANTED. Ms. Trompeter is awarded $36,248.25

2

in fees. Ms. Trompeter shall promptly refund the portion of the EAJA award attributable to

3

attorney’s fees to Mr. Michalski.

4

This order disposes of Docket No. 24.

5
6

IT IS SO ORDERED.

7
8
9
10

Dated: October 24, 2017
______________________________________
EDWARD M. CHEN
United States District Judge

12
For the Northern District of California

United States District Court

11

13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21

22
23
24
25
26
27
28

2