Pyatt v. Commissioner of Social Security

Filing 35

ORDER ADOPTING REPORT AND RECOMMENDATION. AWARDING Plaintiffs attorney fees of $3,006.25. Signed by Judge Algenon L. Marbley on 5/29/2014. (cw)

Download PDF
IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF OHIO EASTERN DIVISION JUDY PYATT, : : : : : : : : : : Plaintiff, v. COMMISSIONER OF SOCIAL SECURITY, Defendant. Case No. 2:09-CV-00475 JUDGE ALGENON L. MARBLEY Magistrate Judge Preston Deavers OPINION & ORDER This matter is before the Court on the Report and Recommendation of the United States Magistrate Judge (Doc. 34). On May 5, 2013, Plaintiff submitted her Motion for Attorney Fees pursuant to 42 U.S.C. § 406(b)(1), in the amount of $5,162.50. (Doc. 32). Defendant does not oppose the fee award, only the amount. Defendant maintains that Plaintiff’s attorney cannot recover fees twice for the same work, and therefore argues that Plaintiff’s request should be offset by the amount she has already recovered. (Doc. 31). On April 8, 2014, the Magistrate Judge recommended that Plaintiff’s Motion be granted, and that the Court award Plaintiff’s counsel $3,006.25 in fees. (Doc. 34 at 2). This reflects the $5,162.50 requested by Plaintiff under the Social Security Act, 42 U.S.C. § 406(b), offset by the $2,156.25 that Plaintiff’s counsel received on January 12, 2011, under the Equal Access to Justice Act, 28 U.S.C. § 2412. (See Doc. 31). The parties were specifically advised of their right to object to the Magistrate’s recommendation. (Doc. 34); see also Pfahler v. Nat’l Latex Prod. Co., 517 F.3d 816, 829 (6th Cir. 2007). No objections have been filed. The deadline for such objections elapsed on April 25, 2014. Accordingly, the Court hereby ADOPTS the Magistrate Judge’s Report and Recommendation, and AWARDS Plaintiff’s attorney fees of $3,006.25. IT IS SO ORDERED. s/ Algenon L. Marbley s ALGENON L. MARBLEY UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE DATED: May 29, 2014 2

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?