Canales v. Social Security Administration

Filing 33

ORDER: Granting Motion for 406(b) Attorney Fees 30 . See 2-page order attached. Signed on 10/27/2012 by Judge Marco A. Hernandez. (mr)

Download PDF
IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE DISTRICT OF OREGON PORTLAND DIVISION XAVIER CANALES, Plaintiff, No. 03:10-cv-01200-HZ v. MICHAEL J. ASTRUE, Commissioner of Social Security, ORDER Defendant. Plaintiff Xavier Canales brought this action seeking review of the Commissioner's decision to deny his applications for disability insurance benefits (DIB) and supplemental security income (SSI). In an October 4, 2011 Opinion & Order, I reversed the Commissioner's decision, concluding that the Administrative Law Judge (ALJ) had erred improperly rejected the opinion of an examining psychologist and that remand for an award of benefits was appropriate. Judgment was entered on October 4, 2011. Plaintiff now seeks an award of fees pursuant to 42 U.S.C. § 406(b). Defendant has no 1 - ORDER objection to the request. I have reviewed the record in the case, the motion, and the supporting materials including the award of benefits, the fee agreement with counsel, and the recitation of counsel's hours and services. Applying the standards set by Gisbrecht v. Barnhart, 535 U.S. 789, 796 (2002), I find the requested fees reasonable. I grant the motion [#30] and award plaintiff's counsel $16,018.25 in attorney's fees under 42 U.S.C. § 406(b). Previously, I awarded plaintiff attorney's fees in the amount of $4,418.50 under the Equal Access to Justice Act (EAJA), 28 U.S.C. § 2412. When issuing the section 406(b) check for payment to plaintiff’s attorney, the Commissioner is directed to subtract the amount previously awarded under EAJA and send plaintiff’s attorney the balance of $11,599.75, less any applicable processing fees as allowed by statute. IT IS SO ORDERED. Dated this day of Marco A. Hernandez United States District Judge 2 - ORDER , 2012

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?