REPORT AND RECOMMENDATION

KARLA R. SPAULDING, Magistrate Judge.

TO THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT:

This cause came on for consideration without oral argument on the following motion filed herein:

Plaintiff, James Earl Jackson, seeks an award of attorney's fees pursuant to the Equal Access to Justice Act ("EAJA"), 28 U.S.C. § 2412. A final judgment reversing the decision below was entered on September 1, 2017. Doc. No. 24. Counsel for Plaintiff represents that the Commissioner does not object to the relief requested. Doc. No. 25, at 3. Thus, the motion is now ripe for consideration.

Plaintiff through Richard A. Culbertson, Esq., his counsel of record, seeks an award of $4,982.36 in EAJA fees. Id. at 1. The fee request covers 1.0 hours of work performed by Mr. Culbertson in 2016 and 1.5 hours of work by him in 2017 and 21.3 hours of work performed by Sarah Fay, Esq., in 2016 and 2.0 hours of work performed by her 2017, for a total of 22.3 hours of attorney work in 2016 and 3.5 hours in 2017. Id. at 2.

The EAJA sets a ceiling of $125.001 on the hourly rate for which attorneys may be compensated under the statute, which courts may adjust upward based on changes in the Consumer Price Index ("CPI"). 28 U.S.C. § 2412(d)(2)(A). Based on calculations of the cost-of-living adjustment using the CPI, Attorney Culbertson requests fees at the rate of $192.67 for work performed by him and Attorney Fay in 2016 and $195.95 for work performed by them in 2017 (average year-to-date). Doc. No. 25, at 7-10. Independent calculations show that the average adjusted hourly rates for 2016 and 2017 are $192.692 and $195.953, respectively. Based on the cost-of-living adjustment, the rates requested for 2016 and 2017 do not exceed the EAJA cap of $125.00 per hour adjusted for inflation. Therefore, I recommend that the Court approve those hourly rates in the absence of objection.

I also find that the total number of hours worked is reasonable in the absence of objection.

Finally, I note that Plaintiff filed his retainer agreement, in which he assigned any fees awarded under the EAJA to his counsel. Doc. No. 25-1. Plaintiff represents that, if the Department of the Treasury determines that he does not owe a federal debt, the parties have agreed that the Commissioner will accept Plaintiff's assignment of EAJA fees and pay fees directly to his counsel. Doc. No. 25, at 2-3. Because the Commissioner has taken inconsistent positions regarding whether she will honor such an assignment, I recommend that the Court not require that the EAJA fees be paid directly to Plaintiff's counsel, but permit the Commissioner to do so in her discretion.

Accordingly, it is RESPECTFULLY RECOMMENDED that Plaintiff's Uncontested Petition for Attorney's Fees (Doc. No. 25) be GRANTED in part, and that the Court ORDER the Commissioner to pay Plaintiff attorney's fees in the amount of $4,982.36.4

NOTICE TO PARTIES

A party has fourteen days from this date to file written objections to the Report and Recommendation's factual findings and legal conclusions. A party's failure to file written objections waives that party's right to challenge on appeal any unobjected-to factual finding or legal conclusion the district judge adopts from the Report and Recommendation. See 11th Cir. R. 3-1.

Recommended.