Opinion
Civil Action 2:13-cv-515
05-30-2014
DEEANNA BLUETTE LEWIS, Plaintiff, v. COMMISSIONER OF SOCIAL SECURITY, Defendant.
Judge Watson
Magistrate Judge King
REPORT AND RECOMMENDATION
On April 4, 2014, the Court reversed the decision of the Commissioner and remanded the action, pursuant to Sentence 4 of 42 U.S.C. § 405(g), for further administrative proceedings. Order, ECF 16; Judgment, ECF 17. On May 2, 2014, plaintiff filed a motion for an attorney fee pursuant to the Equal Access to Justice Act, 28 U.S.C. § 2412 ("EAJA"). Application for Attorney Fees under the Equal Access to Justice Act, ECF 18. The Commissioner has filed no opposition to that motion.
Plaintiff asks for an award of attorney fees in the total amount of $2,861.26, that amount reflecting compensation at the statutory rate plus cost of living increases (totaling $192.03 per hour for work performed in 2013 and $194.70 per hour for work performed in 2014) for 14.85 hours of itemized work. The Court concludes, particularly in light of the Commissioner's failure to oppose the motion, that the request for attorney fees is reasonable and appropriate.
It is therefore RECOMMENDED that plaintiff's motion for attorney fees pursuant to the EAJA, ECF 18, be GRANTED and that plaintiff be awarded an attorney fee and costs in the total amount of $2,861.26.
If any party seeks review by the District Judge of this Report and Recommendation, that party may, within fourteen (14) days, file and serve on all parties objections to the Report and Recommendation, specifically designating this Report and Recommendation, and the part thereof in question, as well as the basis for objection thereto. 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1); Fed. R. Civ. P. 72(b). Response to objections must be filed within fourteen (14) days after being served with a copy thereof. Fed. R. Civ. P. 72(b).
The parties are specifically advised that failure to object to the Report and Recommendation will result in a waiver of the right to de novo review by the District Judge and of the right to appeal the decision of the District Court adopting the Report and Recommendation. See Thomas v. Arn, 474 U.S. 140 (1985); Smith v. Detroit Fed'n of Teachers, Local 231 etc., 829 F.2d 1370 (6th Cir. 1987); United States v. Walters, 638 F.2d 947 (6th Cir. 1981).
__________
Norah McCann King
United States Magistrate Judge