Filed: Jun. 16, 2014
Latest Update: Jun. 16, 2014
Summary: REPORT AND RECOMMENDATION THAT THE PARTIES' JOINT STIPULATION FOR EAJA FEES BE CONSTRUED AS A JOINT, UNOPPOSED MOTION FOR $4,400.00 IN EAJA FEES, AND GRANTED. 1 MICHAEL J. NEWMAN, Magistrate Judge. This case is before the Court pursuant to a request by Plaintiff for an award of her attorney's fees under the Equal Access to Justice Act ("EAJA"), 28 U.S.C. 2412(d). 2 Doc. 18. Plaintiff and the Commissioner filed a stipulation to an award of fees; this stipulation (doc. 18) is construed as a
Summary: REPORT AND RECOMMENDATION THAT THE PARTIES' JOINT STIPULATION FOR EAJA FEES BE CONSTRUED AS A JOINT, UNOPPOSED MOTION FOR $4,400.00 IN EAJA FEES, AND GRANTED. 1 MICHAEL J. NEWMAN, Magistrate Judge. This case is before the Court pursuant to a request by Plaintiff for an award of her attorney's fees under the Equal Access to Justice Act ("EAJA"), 28 U.S.C. 2412(d). 2 Doc. 18. Plaintiff and the Commissioner filed a stipulation to an award of fees; this stipulation (doc. 18) is construed as a ..
More
REPORT AND RECOMMENDATION THAT THE PARTIES' JOINT STIPULATION FOR EAJA FEES BE CONSTRUED AS A JOINT, UNOPPOSED MOTION FOR $4,400.00 IN EAJA FEES, AND GRANTED.1
MICHAEL J. NEWMAN, Magistrate Judge.
This case is before the Court pursuant to a request by Plaintiff for an award of her attorney's fees under the Equal Access to Justice Act ("EAJA"), 28 U.S.C. § 2412(d).2 Doc. 18. Plaintiff and the Commissioner filed a stipulation to an award of fees; this stipulation (doc. 18) is construed as a joint, unopposed motion for $4,400.00 in EAJA fees.
I.
EAJA provides for an award of attorney's fees to a party who prevails in a civil action against the United States "when the position taken by the Government is not substantially justified and no special circumstances exist warranting a denial of fees." Bryant v. Comm'r of Soc. Sec., 578 F.3d 443, 445 (6th Cir. 2009) (citing 28 U.S.C. § 2412(d)(1)(A)). A party who wins a Sentence Four remand is a prevailing party for EAJA purposes. See Shalala v. Schaefer, 509 U.S. 292, 301-02 (1993). EAJA fees are payable to the litigant. Astrue v. Ratliff, 586 U.S. 586, 589 (2010).
II.
On March 19, 2014, Judge Rice adopted the undersigned's Report and Recommendation reversing and remanding this matter under Sentence Four for an immediate award of benefits. Docs. 13, 16. Accordingly, Plaintiff is the prevailing party in this case for EAJA purposes, and is therefore entitled to an award of attorney's fees under EAJA. See Shalala, 509 U.S. at 301-02.
Plaintiff's counsel advises the Court that he worked 27.0 hours on this matter. Doc. 18-1 at PageID 159. At the stipulated amount of $4,400.00, this calculates as $162.96 per hour — an hourly rate not challenged by the Commissioner. Having reviewed the time sheet entries submitted by Plaintiff's counsel, see doc. 18-1 at PageID 158-59, and considering the nature of the work counsel performed in this matter, the Court finds the requested fees reasonable. Compare Kash v. Comm'r of Soc. Sec., No. 3:11-CV-44, 2012 WL 3112373, at *2-3 (S.D. Ohio July 31, 2012) (Newman, M.J.), adopted by 2012 WL 3636936, at *1 (S.D. Ohio Aug. 21, 2012) (Rice, J.) (finding an hourly rate of $176.36 reasonable in an EAJA fee application). Accordingly, Plaintiff is entitled to an EAJA fees award in the amount of $4,400.00.
III.
Based upon the foregoing analysis, IT IS THEREFORE RECOMMENDED THAT:
1. The parties' joint stipulation for an EAJA fee award (doc. 18), construed as a joint, unopposed motion for an award of attorney's fees, be GRANTED;
2. Plaintiff be AWARDED the sum of $4,400.00 in EAJA fees; and
3. As no further matters remain pending for review, this case remain TERMINATED upon the Court's docket.
