IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

FOR THE NORTHERN DISTRICT OF TEXAS

FORT WORTH DIVISION

ROBERT L. KIRKLAND, §

 §

Plaintiff, §

 §

v. § Civil Action No. 4:22-cv-759-O-BP

 § 

COMMISSIONER OF §

SOCIAL SECURITY, §

 §

Defendant. §

FINDINGS, CONCLUSIONS, AND RECOMMENDATION

OF THE UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE

Before the Court are Plaintiff’s Motion for Attorney’s Fees Pursuant to the Equal Access 

to Justice Act and Attorney’s Affirmation in Support of Motion filed on August 3, 2023. ECF Nos. 

25 and 26. This case was referred to the undersigned automatically under Special Order 3 on 

August 26, 2022. ECF No. 5.

Based upon a full review of the pleadings and applicable legal authorities, the agreement 

of the Commissioner to the amount of fees requested by Plaintiff, and the provisions of 28 U.S.C. 

§ 2412(d)(2)(A), the Court finds that the appropriate hourly rate at which to award fees in this case 

is $234.14 per hour for attorney services performed in 2022, $243.54 per hour for attorney services 

performed in 2023, and $100.00 per hour for paralegal services performed in 2022 and 2023. The 

Court further finds that Plaintiff is entitled to recover compensation for attorney services incurred 

of 2.2 hours in 2022 and 41.3 hours in 2022 and for paralegal services incurred of 5.6 hours in 

2022 and 2.5 hours in 2023.

Accordingly, the undersigned RECOMMENDS that United States District Judge Reed 

O’Connor ORDER Defendant to pay Plaintiff Robert L. Kirkland, in care of Howard D. Olinsky, 

Case 4:22-cv-00759-O Document 27 Filed 08/22/23 Page 1 of 2 PageID 3375
2

an attorney, Olinsky Law Group, 250 S. Clinton St., Ste. 210, Syracuse, NY 13202, fees under the 

Equal Access to Justice Act in the agreed upon, reduced total amount of $10,814.14 for 2.2 hours 

of attorney services in 2022 at a rate of $234.14 per hour and for 41.3 hours in 2023 at a rate of 

$243.54 per hour and for 5.6 hours of paralegal services in 2022 and 2.5 hours in 2023 at a rate of 

$100.00 per hour in each year.

A copy of these findings, conclusions, and recommendation shall be served on all parties 

in the manner provided by law. Any party who objects to any part of these findings, conclusions, 

and recommendation must file specific written objections within fourteen days after being served 

with a copy. See 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1); Fed. R. Civ. P. 72(b)(2). To be specific, an objection must 

identify the particular finding or recommendation to which objection is made, state the basis for 

the objection, and specify the place in the magistrate judge’s findings, conclusions, and 

recommendation where the disputed determination is found. An objection that merely incorporates 

by reference or refers to the briefing before the magistrate judge is not specific. Failure to file 

specific written objections will bar the aggrieved party from appealing the factual findings and 

legal conclusions of the magistrate judge that are accepted or adopted by the district court, except 

upon grounds of plain error. See Douglass v. United Servs. Auto. Ass’n, 79 F.3d 1415, 1417 (5th 

Cir. 1996) (en banc).

SIGNED on August 22, 2023. 

______________________________________

Hal R. Ray, Jr.

UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE

Case 4:22-cv-00759-O Document 27 Filed 08/22/23 Page 2 of 2 PageID 3376