OGLES
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 this Social Security Administration appeal, the district court granted plaintiff's unopposed motion for attorney's fees under the Equal Access to Justice Act (EAJA) in the amount of $6,298.65 after the court had previously reversed and remanded the case to the Commissioner for further administrative proceedings.
Plaintiff is the prevailing party entitled to attorney's fees under the EAJA and is awarded $6,298.65. The fees will be paid directly to plaintiff's counsel unless the Department of Treasury determines that plaintiff owes a federal debt, in which case the assignment of fees would be applied against such debt.
[1] A party who obtains a sentence-four remand order in a Social Security benefits case is considered a prevailing party for the purposes of an Equal Access to Justice Act at…
[2] Attorney's fees may be awarded under the Equal Access to Justice Act when the Commissioner of Social Security does not oppose the motion.
Previewing 2 of 4 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 party who wins a sentence-four remand order under 42 U.S.C. § 405(g) is a prevailing party”
Establishes that plaintiff qualifies as prevailing party eligible for EAJA fees based on successful remand
Previewing 1 of 3 key quotes on this case — the court’s exact language, pinpointed for members.
Join FLexlaw to unlock all legal intelligencePlaintiff sought attorney's fees under the EAJA following a favorable court order. On June 24, 2024, the court entered an order reversing and remandin…
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 Sentence Four Remand cases and more on FLexlaw
This cause comes before the Court on Plaintiff's Unopposed Motion for Attorney's Fees (Doc. 31). By the Motion, Plaintiff seeks attorney's fees in the amount of $6,298.65 pursuant to the Equal Access to Justice Act (“EAJA”), 28 U.S.C. § 2412(d). On June 24, 2024, this Court entered an Order reversing and remanding the case to the Commissioner for further administrative proceedings (Doc. 28). Thereafter, the Clerk entered judgment in favor of Plaintiff (Doc. 29).
As the prevailing party, Plaintiff now requests an award of attorney's fees. See 28 U.S.C. § 2412(d)(1)(A); cf. Shalala v. Schaefer, 509 U.S. 292, 300–02 (1993) (concluding that a party who wins a sentence-four remand order under 42 U.S.C. § 405(g) is a prevailing party), superseded by rule on other grounds, Fed. R. Civ. P. 58(c)(2)(B). After issuance of an order awarding EAJA fees, the United States Department of the Treasury will determine whether Plaintiff owes a debt to the government. If Plaintiff has no discernable federal debt, the government will accept Plaintiff's assignment of EAJA fees and pay the fees directly to Plaintiff's counsel.
The Commissioner does not oppose the requested relief (Doc. 31, at 3). Additionally, Plaintiff and Plaintiff's attorney filed affidavits in support of the motion (Docs. 32–33). Therefore, for the reasons set out in Plaintiff's motion and supported by the affidavits, it is hereby
ORDERED:
1. Plaintiff's Unopposed Motion for Attorney's Fees (Doc. 31) is
GRANTED.
2. Plaintiff is awarded fees in the amount of $6,298.65. Unless the Department of Treasury determines that Plaintiff owes a federal debt, the government must pay the fees to Plaintiff's counsel in accordance with Plaintiff's assignment of fees (Doc. 31, at 1; Doc. 32-2).
DONE AND ORDERED in Tampa, Florida, on this 6th day of September 2024.
ANTHONY E. PORCELLI
United States Magistrate Judge cc: Counsel of Record