Campos

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA RICHARD C., Case No.: 3:21-cv-00802-AGS Plaintiff, ORDER GRANTING MOTION FOR 42 U.S.C. § 1383(d)(2)(B) FEES v. (ECF 16) Martin O’MALLEY, Defendant. 8 Plaintiff’s counsel moves for attorney’s fees under U.S.C § 1383(d)(2)(B). Counsel requests $11,100.00, offset by an order “to credit [plaintiff] for EAJA fees previously paid in the amount of $1,100.” (ECF 16, at 1.) This request represents approximately 20% of plaintiff’s past due benefits, which total $55,993.12. (ECF 16-3, at 3.) Plaintiff has not objected. (See ECF 18, at 3.) The government does not oppose. (See ECF 18, at 2.) “The legal standard for analyzing an attorney fee claim under § 1382(d)(2) is the same as the legal standard for analyzing a similar request under 42 U.S.C. § 406(b).” Roland S. v. Kijakazi, No. 3:20-CV-01068-AHG, 2023 WL 6966153, at *1 (S.D. Cal. Oct. 20, 2023); see 42 U.S.C. § 1383(d)(2)(A) (“The provisions of section 406 . .…