TEFEL
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.
In a Social Security case, the district court adopted a magistrate judge's report and recommendation granting plaintiff's unopposed motion for attorney's fees under the Equal Access to Justice Act in the amount of $7,250.00.
The district court granted plaintiff's unopposed motion for attorney's fees and awarded $7,250.00 in attorney's fees and costs. The court adopted the magistrate judge's report and recommendation in its entirety.
[1] A district court must conduct a de novo review of portions of a magistrate judge's report and recommendation to which an objection is made.
[2] When no objections are filed, a district court reviews a magistrate judge's report and recommendation for clear error.
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“A district court must 'make a de novo determination of those portions of the [report and recommendation] to which an objection is made.'”
Establishes the standard of review when objections are filed to a magistrate judge's report and recommendation.
Previewing 1 of 3 key quotes on this case — the court’s exact language, pinpointed for members.
Join FLexlaw to unlock all legal intelligencePlaintiff Tefel brought a case against Frank Bisignano, Commissioner of Social Security. Plaintiff filed an unopposed motion for attorney's fees and c…
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 Anthony E. Porcelli, United States Magistrate Judge, entered on July 1, 2025. (Doc. 18). Judge Porcelli recommends that “Plaintiff's Unopposed Motion for Attorney's Fees Pursuant to the Equal Access to Justice Act and Memorandum in Support" (Doc. 17) be granted. Judge Porcelli specifically recommends that Plaintiff be awarded $7,250.00 in attorney's fees and costs.
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); 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,
Page 1 of 2
677 F. 2d 404, 409 (5th Cir. 1982).
Upon due consideration of the record, including Judge Porcelli's report and recommendation, the Court adopts the report and recommendation. Consequently, Plaintiff's motion for attorney's fees is granted.
Accordingly, it is
ORDERED, ADJUDGED, and DECREED:
(1) Judge Porcelli's report and recommendation (Doc. 18) is AFFIRMED and ADOPTED and INCORPORATED BY REFERENCE into this Order for all purposes, including appellate review.
(2) "Plaintiff's Unopposed Motion for Attorney's Fees Pursuant to the Equal Access to Justice Act and Memorandum in Support" (Doc. 17) is hereby GRANTED. Plaintiff is awarded $7,250.00 in attorney's fees and costs. Unless the Department of Treasury determines that Plaintiff owes a federal debt, the Government must pay the fees and costs to Plaintiff's counsel in accordance with Plaintiff's assignment (Doc. 17-4).
(3) The Clerk is DIRECTED to enter an amended judgment that includes the award of attorney's fees and costs, as set forth herein.
DONE and ORDERED in Chambers, in Tampa, Florida, this 16th day of July, 2025.
TOM BARBER UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE
Page 2 of 2
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)