Francisco Valencia v. Frank Bisignano, Commissioner of Social Security

Good Law
United States District Court, Eastern District of CaliforniaOctober 28, 20252:24-cv-02847California903 words

Opinion

trial_court Opinion

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

9

FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

10 11 FRANCISCO VALENCIA, Case No. 2:24-cv-2847-JDP (SS) 12 Plaintiff, 13 v. ORDER 14 FRANK BISIGNANO, Commissioner of 15 Social Security, 16 Defendant. 17 18 Plaintiff’s counsel seeks an award of attorney fees under 42 U.S.C. § 406(b).1 ECF No. 19 21. Plaintiff entered into a contingent fee agreement providing that he would pay counsel twenty- 20 five percent of any award of past-due benefits. ECF No. 21-1 at 2. After this court remanded for 21 further proceedings, plaintiff was found disabled and awarded $86,209.00 in past-due benefits. 22 ECF No. 21-2 at 4.2 Plaintiff’s counsel requests $21,552.25 in attorney fees, which is equivalent 23 24 1 Although the motion for fees was filed under plaintiff’s name, plaintiff’s counsel is the 25 real party in interest. See Gisbrecht v. Barnhart, 535 U.S. 789, 798 n.6 (2002). 2 Social Security’s Notice of Award states: “We usually withhold 25 percent of past due 26 benefits in order to pay the approved representative’s fee. We withheld $21,552.25 from your 27 past due…

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.