Renfro v. Social Security Administration, Commissioner of
Filing
27
ORDER granting 21 Motion for Attorney Fees; adopting Report and Recommendations re 26 Report and Recommendations. Signed by District Judge Harry S Mattice, Jr on 1/7/15. (KFB, )
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
EASTERN DISTRICT OF TENNESSEE
at GREENEVILLE
FREDERICK ARLEN RENFRO,
)
)
Plaintiff,
)
)
v.
)
)
COMMISSIONER OF SOCIAL SECURITY )
)
Defendant.
)
)
Case No. 2:12-cv-00008
Judge Mattice
Magistrate Judge Lee
ORDER
On October 17, 2014, United States Magistrate Judge Susan K. Lee filed her
Report and Recommendation (Doc. 26) pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1) and Federal
Rule of Civil Procedure 72(b).
Magistrate Judge Lee recommended that Plaintiff’s
Motion for Attorney’s Fees be granted and that Plaintiff’s counsel be awarded attorney’s
fees in the amount of $10,886.50, and that the previously awarded EAJA fee of
$2,263.50 be refunded to Plaintiff. (Id.).
The parties have not filed objections to the Magistrate Judge’s Report and
Recommendation.1 Nevertheless, the Court has reviewed de novo the record in this
matter, and it agrees with Magistrate Judge Lee’s well-reasoned conclusions.
Accordingly, the Court ACCEPTS and ADOPTS Magistrate Judge Lee’s findings
of fact, conclusions of law, and recommendations pursuant to § 636(b)(1) and Rule
72(b).
Plaintiff’s Motion for Attorney’s Fees is GRANTED.
Plaintiff’s counsel is
Magistrate Judge Lee specifically advised the parties that they had 14 days in which to object to the
Report and Recommendation and that failure to do so would waive the right to appeal the district court’s
order. (Doc. 26 at 5 n.4); see Fed. R. Civ. P. 72(b)(2); see also Thomas v. Arn, 474 U.S. 140, 148-51 (1985)
(noting that “[i]t does not appear that Congress intended to require district court review of a magistrate's
factual or legal conclusions, under a de novo or any other standard, when neither party objects to those
findings”).
1
attorney’s fees in the amount of $10,886.50, and the previously awarded EAJA fee of
$2,263.50 be credited to Plaintiff.
SO ORDERED this 7th day of January, 2015.
/s/ Harry S. Mattice, Jr._______
HARRY S. MATTICE, JR.
UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE
2
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?