Hays v. Commissioner of Social Security
Filing
33
ORDER ADOPTING REPORT AND RECOMMENDATIONS 32 -The Amended Report and Recommendation (Doc. 32) filed on February 2,2017 is ADOPTED in full, Plaintiff's motion for attorney's fees under the Social Security Act 25 is GRANTED, Plaintiff's counsel is AWARDED $18,401.00 in attorney's fees; and the the case remains TERMINATED on the docket of this Court. Signed by Judge Thomas M. Rose on 2-21-2017. (de)
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF OHIO
WESTERN DIVISION AT DAYTON
JEFFREY HAYES,
: Case No. 3:13-cv-247
:
Plaintiff,
: District Judge Thomas M. Rose
:
vs.
: Magistrate Judge Michael J. Newman
:
NANCY A. BERRYHILL,
:
Acting Commissioner of the Social
:
Security Administration,
:
:
Defendant.
:
____________________________________________________________________________________
ORDER ADOPTING AMENDED REPORT AND RECOMMENDATION (DOC. 32)
____________________________________________________________________________________
The Court reviewed the Amended Report and Recommendation of United States Magistrate
Judge Michael J. Newman (Doc. 32), to whom this case was referred pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 636(b),
and noting that no objections have been filed thereto and that the time for filing such objections under
Fed. R. Civ. P. 72(b) has expired, hereby ADOPTS said Amended Report and Recommendation.
Accordingly, it is hereby ORDERED that:
1. The Amended Report and Recommendation (Doc. 32) filed on February 2,
2017 is ADOPTED in full;
2. Plaintiff’s motion for attorney’s fees under the Social Security Act (Doc. 25)
is GRANTED;
3. Plaintiff’s counsel is AWARDED $18,401.00 in attorney’s fees; and
4. The case remains TERMINATED on the docket of this Court.
DONE and ORDERED in Dayton, Ohio, this Tuesday, February 21, 2017.
s/Thomas M. Rose
________________________________
THOMAS M. ROSE
UNITED STATES 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?