Absent any demonstration that the hours worked were redundant or unnecessary, the Court will defer to prevailing counsel's professional judgment that preparing a substantive complaint is an effective strategy in a disability appeal. See Garcia v. Comm'r of Soc. Sec. Admin., No. CV 18-504-TUC-LAB, 2019 WL 4673335, at *2 (D. Ariz. Sept. 25, 2019) (same counsel's practice of filing longer and more detailed Social Security complaints not inefficient or redundant). The Court declines to reduce the fee request by the proposed 9.1 hours.

This Court, however, recognizes that more-developed complaints can create downstream efficiencies, potentially shortening the time required to draft later briefs and “persuad[ing] the Commissioner that [a] case should be remanded before the case is fully briefed.” Garcia v. Comm'r of Soc. Sec. Admin., No. CIV 18-504-TUC-LAB, 2019 WL 4673335, at *2 (D. Ariz. Sept. 25, 2019).

Indeed, it is possible . . . that a well prepared complaint can persuade the Commissioner that this case should be remanded before the case is fully briefed, which would save all parties time and money. Garcia v. Comm'r of Social Sec. Admin., No. CIV 18-504-TUC-LAB, 2019 WL 4673335, at *2 (D. Ariz. Sep. 25, 2019).

In fact, this Court has indicated that even if the "complaint is longer and more detailed" than the common complaint, it may nonetheless be reasonable when the "request is not significantly larger than those submitted by other practitioners in this area." Garcia v. Comm'r of Soc. Sec. Admin., No. CIV 18-504-TUC-LAB, 2019 WL 4673335, at *2 (D. Ariz. Sept. 25, 2019). Here, the amount requested is not unreasonable.