Dominguez v. Social Security Administration

Docket 1:21-cv-00380

Filed
2021-04-26
Terminated
2022-08-02
Case type
cv

Outcome

magistrate appeal denied

FJC civil IDB DISTRICT=84 OFFICE=1 DOCKET=2100380 FILEDATE=04/26/2021 DISP=20, PROCPROG=4, JUDGMENT=0; codebook: https://www.fjc.gov/sites/default/files/idb/codebooks/Civil%20Codebook%201988%20Forward%2010252023.pdf

Outcome source

Parties and representation

      Party and firm records are not available for this case.

      Panel

        No sourced panel votes are recorded.

        Opinions and documents

        IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE DISTRICT OF NEW MEXICO ANDREA C. DOMINGUEZ, Plaintiff, VS. Civ. No. 21-00380 SMV KILOLO KIJAKAZI,! Acting Commissioner of the Social Security Administration, Defendant. ORDER GRANTING UNOPPOSED MOTION FOR ATTORNEY FEES PURSUANT TO THE EQUAL ACCESS TO JUSTICE ACT The Court, having reviewed the parties’ Unopposed Motion for Attorney Fees Pursuant to the Equal Access to Justice Act (“EAJA”), 28 U.S.C. § 2412 (Doc. 35), HEREBY ORDERS that attorney fees be, and hereby are, awarded under the EAJA, payable to Plaintiff but mailed to Plaintiffs attorney in the amount of $8,500.00 in attorney fees. See Astrue v. Ratliff, 560 U.S. 586 (2010) CEAJA fees are paid to the prevailing party, not the attorney). IT IS FURTHER ORDERED THAT, if Plaintiffs counsel receives attorney fees under both the EAJA and 42 U.S.C. § 406(b) of the Social Security Act, Plaintiff's counsel shall refund the smaller award to Plaintiff pursuant to Weakley v. Bowen, 803 F.2d 575, 580 (10th Cir. 1986). \ LAL UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE STEPHAN M. VIDMAR Kilolo Kijakazi was appointed Acting Commissioner of the Social Security Administration on July 9, 2021. SUBMITTED AND APPROVED BY: Filed Electronically 10/31/2022 Laura J. Johnson Attorney for Plaintiff Armstrong Johnson Law, LLC Electronically Approved 10/31/2022 Jessica Milano Special Assistant U.S. Attorney Office of Program Litigation – 6 Social Security Administration

        Not legal advice. These patterns come from public court records, not ratings of judges as people. They may reflect the types of cases a judge handles, local procedures or other factors, and they do not account for the facts of any individual case. Past patterns do not predict future rulings. Records can be incomplete, months behind current activity, or matched to the wrong person; sealed and confidential cases are not included. Use this as one piece of information, never the sole basis for legal strategy or a recusal motion. Full disclaimer: https://judgefinder.io/legal/disclaimer Read the full disclaimer.