RIVERA
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 adopted the magistrate judge's recommendation to grant the plaintiff's unopposed motion for attorney's fees.
The plaintiff sought attorney's fees under 42 U.S.C. § 406(b) after a favorable outcome in a Social Security Administration case. The magistrate judge…
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 Clear Error Review cases and more on FLexlaw
This matter is before the Court on consideration of the report and recommendation of Monte C. Richardson, United States Magistrate Judge, entered on June 28, 2021. (Doc. 32). Judge Richardson recommends “Plaintiff’s Unopposed Motion for an Award of Attorney’s Fees Pursuant to 42 U.S.C. § 406(b)” (Doc. 29) be granted. Specifically, Judge Richardson recommends that Plaintiff be awarded reasonable attorney’s fees in the amount of $13,080.00. The motion was unopposed and no objection to the report and recommendation was filed. 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); Camby v. Davis, 718 F. 2d 198, 199 (4th Cir. 1983); Williams v. Wainwright, 681 F. 2d 732 (11th Cir. 1982). A district court must “make a de novo determination of those portions of the [report and recommendation] to which an objection is made.” 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1)(C). When no objection is filed, a court reviews the report and recommendation for clear error. Macort v. Prem, Inc., 208 F. App’x 781, 784 (11th Cir. 2006); Nettles v. Wainwright, 677 F. 2d 404, 409 (5th Cir. 1982). Upon due consideration of the record, including Judge Richardson’s report and recommendation, in conjunction with an independent examination of the file, the Court adopts the report and recommendation in all respects. The Court agrees with Judge Richardson’s detailed and well-reasoned factual findings and legal conclusions. Consequently, “Plaintiff’s Unopposed Motion for Award of Attorney’s Fees Pursuant to 42 U.S.C. § 406(b)” (Doc. 29) is granted. Accordingly, it is
ORDERED, ADJUDGED, and DECREED: 1. The report and recommendation (Doc. 32) is AFFIRMED and ADOPTED and INCORPORATED BY REFERENCE into this Order for all purposes, including appellate review. 2. “Plaintiff’s Unopposed Motion for Award of Attorney’s Fees Pursuant to 42 U.S.C. § 406(b)” (Doc. 29) is GRANTED. 3. The Commissioner is directed to pay to Plaintiff’s counsel the sum of
$13,080.00 for § 406(b) fees out of Plaintiff’s past-due benefits. The Clerk is directed to enter judgment accordingly. 4. Plaintiffs attorney is directed to refund the EAJA fee award of $6,791.12 to Plaintiff upon receipt of the § 406(b) fees. DONE and ORDERED in Chambers, in Tampa, Florida, this 16th day of August, 2021.
[...] / | / ont 2
TOM BARBER
UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE
Cases With Similar Vibessemantic neighbors from the corpus
Citator
Authorities Cited
- Ennis Nettles v. Louie L. Wainwright, 677 F.2d 404 (5th Cir. 1982)
- Williams v. Louie L. Wainwright, 681 F.2d 732 (11th Cir. 1982)
- Camby v. Davis, 718 F.2d 198 (4th Cir. 1983)