Source: s3://data.kl3m.ai/documents/govinfo/USCOURTS/USCOURTS-caed-2_11-cv-01634/USCOURTS-caed-2_11-cv-01634-6/pdf.json

Nature of Suit Code: 863
Nature of Suit: Social Security - DIWC/DIWW (405(g))
Cause of Action: 42:405 Review of HHS Decision (DIWC)

---

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25

26

27

28

1

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

JOHN OLIVERI,

Plaintiff,

v.

CAROLYN W. COLVIN, Acting 

Commissioner of Social Security,

Defendant.

No. 2:11-cv-1634 CKD

ORDER

Counsel for plaintiff in the above-entitled action seeks an award of attorney fees in the 

amount of $13,270.25 after an offset for fees previously awarded under EAJA. 

42 U.S.C. § 406(b)(1)(A) provides, in relevant part:

Whenever a court renders a judgment favorable to a claimant under 

this subchapter who was represented before the court by an 

attorney, the court may determine and allow as part of its judgment 

a reasonable fee for such representation, not in excess of 25 percent 

of the total of the past-due benefits to which the claimant is entitled 

by reason of such judgment.

Rather than being paid by the government, fees under the Social Security Act are awarded out of 

the claimant’s disability benefits. Russell v. Sullivan, 930 F.2d 1443, 1446 (9th Cir. 1991), 

receded from on other grounds, Sorenson v. Mink, 239 F.3d 1140, 1149 (9th Cir. 2001). 

However, the 25 percent statutory maximum fee is not an automatic entitlement; the court also 

Case 2:11-cv-01634-CKD Document 30 Filed 07/13/15 Page 1 of 2
1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25

26

27

28

2

must ensure that the requested fee is reasonable. Gisbrecht v. Barnhart, 535 U.S. 789, 808-09 

(2002) (“We hold that § 406(b) does not displace contingent-fee agreements within the statutory 

ceiling; instead, § 406(b) instructs courts to review for reasonableness fees yielded by those 

agreements.”). “Within the 25 percent boundary ... the attorney for the successful claimant must 

show that the fee sought is reasonable for the services rendered.” Id. at 807. 

Counsel has not set forth the number of hours spent on this matter. In the absence of such 

information, the court cannot make the reasonableness determination required under Gisbrecht.

Accordingly, IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that no later than July 24, 2015, plaintiff’s 

counsel shall submit a supplemental declaration setting forth the number of hours expended on 

this matter and characterize the tasks performed for said hours.

Dated: July 13, 2015

4 oliveri1634.ss.fb

_____________________________________

CAROLYN K. DELANEY

UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE

Case 2:11-cv-01634-CKD Document 30 Filed 07/13/15 Page 2 of 2