Paige v. Commissioner of Social Security Administration

Filing 17

REPORT AND RECOMMENDATION It is recommended that plaintiffs motion for an award of attorneys fees, Doc. No. 15 be granted consistent with the parties stipulation Doc. No. 16 motion for attorney Fees . Objections to R&R due by 6/17/2013. Signed by Magistrate Judge Norah McCann King on 5/30/13. (rew)

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
FOR THE SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF OHIO
EASTERN DIVISION

LEONARD G. PAIGE,
Plaintiff,

vs.

Civil Action 2:12-cv-764
Judge Frost
Magistrate Judge King

CAROLYN W. COLVIN,
ACTING COMMISSIONER
OF SOCIAL SECURITY,
Defendant.

REPORT AND RECOMMENDATION
Plaintiff filed a motion for an award of attorney’s fees,
Doc. No. 15, and the parties have stipulated to an award of attorney
fees in the amount of $2,730.05 under the Equal Access to Justice Act,
28 U.S.C. § 2412, and costs in the amount of $369.95, for a total of
$3,100.00.

Joint Stipulation to Award Attorney’s Fees under the Equal

Access to Justice Act, Doc. No. 16.
It is RECOMMENDED that plaintiff’s motion for an award of
attorney’s fees, Doc. No. 15, be granted consistent with the parties’
stipulation, Doc. No. 16.

It is SPECIFICALLY RECOMMENDED that

plaintiff be awarded an attorney’s fee in the amount of $2,730.05
under the Equal Access to Justice Act, 28 U.S.C. § 2412, and costs in
the amount of $369.95, for a total of $3,100.00.
If any party seeks review by the District Judge of this
Report and Recommendation, that party may, within fourteen (14) days,
file

and

serve

on

all

parties

objections

to

the

Report

and

Recommendation,

specifically

designating

this

Report

and

Recommendation, and the part thereof in question, as well as the basis
for objection thereto.

28 U.S.C. §636(b)(1); Fed. R. Civ. P. 72(b).

Response to objections must be filed within fourteen (14) days after
being served with a copy thereof.

Fed. R. Civ. P. 72(b).

The parties are specifically advised that failure to object
to the Report and Recommendation will result in a waiver of the right
to de novo review by the District Judge and of the right to appeal the
decision of the District Court adopting the Report and Recommendation.
See Thomas v. Arn, 474 U.S. 140 (1985); Smith v. Detroit Fed’n of
Teachers, Local 231 etc., 829 F.2d 1370 (6th Cir. 1987); United States
v. Walters,

638 F.2d 947 (6th Cir. 1981).

s/Norah McCann King
Norah McCann King
United States Magistrate Judge
May 30, 2013