Uselman v. Commissioner Social Security Administration

Filing 29

ORDER: Granting Motion for Attorney Fees 27 . Signed on 10/24/2017 by Judge Marco A. Hernandez. (joha)

Download PDF
IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE DISTRICT OF OREGON CAREY USELMAN, No. 3:15-cv-00923-HZ Plaintiff, ORDER v. NANCY A. BERRYHILL, Acting Commissioner of Social Security, Defendant. Plaintiff Carey Uselman brought this action seeking review of the Commissioner’s final decision to deny disability insurance benefits (“DIB”). In a March 16, 2016 Opinion & Order, the Court reversed the Commissioner’s decision, and ordered that the case be remanded for further administrative proceedings. Judgment was also entered on March 16, 2016. Plaintiff now seeks an award of fees pursuant to 42 U.S.C. § 406(b). Defendant has no objection to the request. The Court has 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), The Court finds the requested fees reasonable. The Court grants the motion [27] and award Plaintiff’s counsel $15,400 in attorney’s fees under 42 U.S.C. § 406(b). Previously, the Court awarded Plaintiff attorney’s fees in the amount of $2,131.14 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 $13,268.86, less any applicable processing fees as allowed by statute. Any amount withheld after all administrative and court attorney's fees are paid should be released to the claimant. IT IS SO ORDERED. Dated this day of Marco A. Hernández United States District Judge , 2017

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?