AJAYA JASMINE BLAKE
v.
COMMISSIONER OF SOCIAL SECURITY
AI-generated. These summaries, headnotes, and key points are machine-generated and may contain errors or omissions. Always verify against the full opinion text below. Not legal advice.
A district court granted a plaintiff's unopposed motion for attorney's fees and costs totaling $8,962.30 under the Equal Access to Justice Act (EAJA) in a Social Security case. The court adopted the magistrate judge's recommendation in full after conducting independent review.
The court granted the plaintiff's unopposed motion for attorney's fees and costs under the EAJA, awarding $8,557.30 in attorney's fees and $405.00 in costs, to be paid to plaintiff's counsel if plaintiff does not owe a debt to the government.
[1] A district judge must conduct a de novo determination of portions of a magistrate judge's report and recommendation to which specific objections are made.
[2] In the absence of specific objections, a district judge may accept, reject, or modify a magistrate judge's report and recommendation in whole or in part.
Previewing 2 of 5 headnotes on this case. FLexlaw’s editorially structured points of law — every proposition, pinpointed — are reserved for members.
Join FLexlaw to unlock all legal intelligence“After conducting a careful and complete review of the findings and recommendations, a district judge may accept, reject or modify the Magistrate Judge's report and recommendation.”
Establishes the standard of review for magistrate judge reports and recommendations under 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1)
Previewing 1 of 3 key quotes on this case — the court’s exact language, pinpointed for members.
Join FLexlaw to unlock all legal intelligencePlaintiff Ajaya Jasmine Blake brought an action against the Commissioner of Social Security. A Magistrate Judge issued a Report and Recommendation rec…
The full statement of facts, procedural history, and disposition for this case are member content.
Join FLexlaw to unlock all legal intelligence© FLexlaw, Inc. — AI-generated enrichments are proprietary. All rights reserved.
Explore caselaw by topic → Browse Motion For Attorney'S Fees cases and more on FLexlaw
Before the Court is the Report and Recommendation of Magistrate Judge Amanda Arnold Sansone, (Dkt. 21), recommending that the Court grant the Plaintiff's Unopposed Motion for Attorney's Fees Pursuant to the Equal Access to Justice Act (“EAJA”), 28 U.S.C. § 2412(d). (Dkt. 20) Plaintiff seeks an award of attorneys' fees in the amount of $8,557.30 and costs in the amount of $405.00 pursuant to the EAJA. Plaintiff certified that Defendant has no objection to the Motion. (Dkt. 20-4)
After conducting a careful and complete review of the findings and recommendations, a district judge may accept, reject or modify the Magistrate Judge's report and recommendation. 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1); Williams v. Wainwright, 681 F. 2d 732, 732 (11th Cir. 1982), cert. denied, 459 U.S. 1112 (1983). A district judge "shall make a de novo determination of those portions of the report or specified proposed findings or recommendations to which objection is made." 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1)(C). This requires that the district judge "give fresh consideration to those issues to which specific objection has been made by a party.” Jeffrey S. v. State Bd. of Educ., 896 F. 2d 507, 512 (11th Cir.1990) (quoting H.R. 1609, 94th Cong. § 2 (1976)). In the absence
of specific objections, there is no requirement that a district judge review factual findings de novo, Garvey v. Vaughn, 993 F. 2d 776, 779 n.9 (11th Cir. 1993), and the court may accept, reject, or modify, in whole or in part, the findings and recommendations. 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1)(C). The district judge reviews legal conclusions de novo, even in the absence of an objection. See Cooper-Houston v. Southern Ry., 37 F. 3d 603, 604 (11th Cir. 1994).
Upon consideration of the Report and Recommendation, in conjunction with an independent examination of the file, the Court is of the opinion that the Report and Recommendation should be adopted, confirmed, and approved in all respects. Accordingly, it is ORDERED that:
1. The Report and Recommendation of Judge Sansone is
CONFIRMED and APPROVED in all respects and made a part of this order for all purposes;
2. Plaintiff's Motion for Attorney's Fees Pursuant to the Equal Access to Justice Act (Dkt. 20) is GRANTED; and
3. Plaintiff is awarded attorneys' fees in the amount of $8,557.30, and costs in the amount of $405.00 under the EAJA. The fees and costs are payable directly to Plaintiff's counsel if it is determined that Plaintiff does not owe a debt to the government.
DONE and ORDERED in Tampa, Florida, this 27th day of October 2025.
Copies furnished to: Counsel of Record Any Unrepresented Person
2
MARY S SCRIVEN
UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE
Cases With Similar Vibessemantic neighbors from the corpus
Citator
Authorities Cited
- Marina Cooper-Houston v. S. Ry. Co., 37 F.3d 603 (11th Cir. 1994)
- Garvey v. Vaughn, 993 F.2d 776 (11th Cir. 1993)
- Coleman v. City of Winston-Salem, 459 U.S. 1112 (U.S. 1983)