Smelcer v. Commissioner Social Security Administration
ORDER: Granting Motion for Attorney Fees 25 . (See 2 page Order attached.) Signed on 10/24/2017 by Judge Marco A. Hernandez. (sss)
IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
FOR THE DISTRICT OF OREGON
ROBERT L. SMELCER,
No. 6:15-cv-00838 -HZ
NANCY A. BERRYHILL,
Acting Commissioner of Social Security,
Plaintiff Robert Smelcer brought this action seeking review of the Commissioner’s final
decision to deny disability insurance benefits (“DIB”). In a July 6, 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 July 6, 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  and award Plaintiff’s counsel $28,898.75 in attorney’s
fees under 42 U.S.C. § 406(b). Previously, the Court awarded Plaintiff attorney’s fees in the
amount of $6,249.80 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 $22,648.95, 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.
Marco A. Hernández
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?