TORRES
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.
The Court adopts the Magistrate Judge's Report and Recommendation, awarding Plaintiff additional attorney's fees and costs under the Equal Access to Justice Act.
Plaintiff, having previously been awarded Social Security disability benefits and attorney's fees, moved for additional fees incurred litigating the i…
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 Social Security Disability Benefits Appeal cases and more on FLexlaw
Before the Court is Plaintiff Jorge Torres's Unopposed Motion for Attorney's Fees (Doc. 47).
In this Social Security disability benefits appeal, the Court reversed Defendant Commissioner's decision and awarded Plaintiff benefits. (Docs. 31, 32.) Plaintiff then moved for an award of attorney's fees and costs under the Equal Access to Justice Act (“EAJA”), and Defendant failed to timely respond. (Doc. 34.)
On referral, U.S. Magistrate Judge Robert M. Norway entered a Report and Recommendation (“R&R") submitting that the Court should award Plaintiff the full amount of fees and costs he requested. (Doc. 35.) After the R&R had been entered, Defendant requested an extension of time to file a response to Plaintiff's motion, which Judge Norway denied. (Docs. 36, 39.) But Defendant did timely
object to the R&R. (Doc. 40.) Plaintiff responded in support of the R&R and requested an award of additional fees incurred since the entry of the R&R. (Doc. 41.) The Court overruled Defendant's objection, adopted the R&R, and awarded Plaintiff the amount of fees originally requested in his motion. (Doc. 46.) The Court also directed Plaintiff to file a new motion for the additional fees incurred while litigating his first motion for fees. (Id. at 3-4.) Plaintiff did so (Doc. 47), and on referral Judge Norway entered an R&R stating that the Court should award additional EAJA fees of $3,211.14 to Plaintiff as the prevailing party (Doc. 50). The time has passed and there were no objections, so the Court examines the R&R for clear error only. See Macort v. Prem, Inc., 208 F. App'x 781, 784 (11th Cir. 2006). Finding none, the R&R is due to be adopted in its entirety.
Accordingly, it is ORDERED AND ADJUDGED:
1. The instant R&R (Doc. 50) is ADOPTED AND CONFIRMED and made a part of this Order in its entirety.
2. Plaintiff's motion (Doc. 47) is GRANTED to the extent that Plaintiff, as a prevailing party, is AWARDED an additional $3,211.14 of EAJA attorney's fees and costs. The total sum of EAJA fees awarded to Plaintiff in this case is $30,930.73. The remainder of Plaintiff's motion is DENIED.
3. The file is to remain closed.
2
DONE AND ORDERED in Chambers in Orlando, Florida, on March 14, 2025.
ROY B. DALTON, JR.
United States District Judge