Duran v. Commissioner of Social Security

Full title: Johanny Duran Plaintiff, v. Commissioner of Social Security, Defendant.

Court: United States District Court, S.D. New York

Date published: Jun 15, 2021

CIVIL 20-cv-05464-JMF-RWL (S.D.N.Y. Jun. 15, 2021)

Opinion

CIVIL 20-cv-05464-JMF-RWL

06-15-2021

Johanny Duran Plaintiff, v. Commissioner of Social Security, Defendant.

Daniel Berger Attorney for Plaintiff

HON. ROBERT W. LEHRBURGER, UNITED STATES MAGI STRATE JUDGE

Daniel Berger Attorney for Plaintiff

MOTION FOR ATTORNEY'S FEES PURSUANT TO THE EQUAL ACCESS TO JUSTICE ACT 28U.S.C. §2412

HON. ROBERT W. LEHRBURGER, UNITED STATES MAGI STRATE JUDGE

COUNSEL:

PLEASE TAKE NOTICE that upon the annexed affidavit of Daniel Berger, attorney for the plaintiff, and the other papers, the plaintiff makes a motion before this Court, for an order:

1. Awarding attorney's fees plus costs in the sum of $4, 305.00 pursuant to the Equal Access to Justice Act; and

2. Granting such other and further relief as may be deemed just and proper.

Plaintiff, by and through her attorney, Daniel Berger, hereby moves the court to award attorney's fees to be paid by the defendant pursuant to the Equal Access to Justice Act, 28, USC §2412. Plaintiff asks for an award of attorney's fees in the amount of $4, 305.00 to be paid to plaintiffs attorney calculated at the rate of $213.00 per hour for 20.0 hours of work performed by Daniel Berger paralegal fees to be calculated at the rate of $90.00 per hour for 0.5 hours of work performed on this case in Federal Court.

Plaintiff is entitled to receive attorney's fees pursuant to the Equal Access to Justice Act because she is the prevailing party in this action, is an individual whose net worth did not exceed two million dollars at the time the action was filed as is demonstrated by plaintiffs attached signed IFP Application and EAJA Affidavit, and the position of the United States in this litigation and at the agency was not substantially justified. Although the burden of proof on the issue of substantial justification is on the government, plaintiffs supporting memorandum briefly addresses this issue.

There are no special circumstances in this case which make an award under the EAJA unjust. This motion is supported by affidavit of plaintiff, affidavit of plaintiff s attorney, memorandum, federal court retainer signed by plaintiff, and plaintiffs signed IFP application.

SO ORDERED.