Friedman

Friedman v. Kijakazi

Good Law
United States District Court, Southern District of CaliforniaNovember 27, 20243:22-cv-01394California979 words

Opinion

Trial Court Opinion

I. BACKGROUND

22 Plaintiffs Felice and Craig F. filed this case in 2022, seeking review of the 23 Commissioner of Social Security’s (“Commissioner”) denial of their heir’s application for 24 25 1 In the interest of privacy, this Order uses only the first name and the initial of the last 26 name of the non-governmental party in this case. CivLR 7.1(e)(6)(b). 27 2 Martin O’Malley is substituted for Kilolo Kijakazi pursuant to Fed. R. Civ. P. 25(d). 28 disability insurance benefits. Dkt. No. 1. The Court remanded the case for further 2 proceedings pursuant to the parties’ joint motion for voluntary remand. Dkt. No. 18. 3 Pursuant to the parties’ joint motion, the Court awarded Plaintiff $2,622.34 in attorney fees 4 under the Equal Access for Justice Act (“EAJA”). Dkt. No. 21. An EAJA fee award of 5 $4761.45 was also awarded to Plaintiffs’ counsel in a related, previous remand of the 6 Commissioner’s denial of benefits. Dkt. No. 22 at 5–6. 7 On remand, the Commissioner issued a decision favorable to Plaintiff and awarded 8 $93,723.00 in past-due disability benefits. Dkt. No. 22 at 2. The Commissioner withheld 9 $23,430.75 from the past-due benefits in…

Sign in to read the full opinion

Create a free account to read the complete opinion text, citation history, and good-law status for this case.