Ellick

Ellick v. Barnhart

Good Law
445 F. Supp. 2d 1166·2006 WL 2458640·2006 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 80532
United States District Court, Central District of CaliforniaAugust 17, 2006CV 03-6814-ECalifornia345 words

Opinion

Opinion

Eick, J.

OPINION AND ORDER GRANTING IN PART COUNSEL’S MOTION FOR ATTORNEY FEES PURSUANT TO 42 U.S.C. SECTION 406(b)

PROCEEDINGS

On June 16, 2006, counsel for Plaintiff filed “Counsel’s Notice of Motion and Motion for Attorney Fees Pursuant to 42 USC § 406 (b), etc.” (“the Motion”), seeking $18,500. On July 12, 2006, Defendant filed a response that purportedly takes no position as to whether the requested fee is reasonable, but notes certain factors for the Court’s consideration. Counsel for Plaintiff filed a reply on July 17, 2006. The Court has taken the Motion under submission without oral argument. See Local Rule 7-15; June 16, 2006 Minute Order.

BACKGROUND

Plaintiff filed a complaint on September 26, 2003, seeking review of the Commissioner’s denial of disability benefits. Fol lowing Defendant’s answer, Plaintiff filed a motion for summary judgment. The motion for summary judgment asserted that the Commissioner’s denial should be reversed, and benefits should be awarded, because: (1) the Administrative Law Judge (“ALJ”) allegedly failed to offer any reason to reject the treating physician’s opinion that Plaintiff is disabled; and (2) the ALJ allegedly failed to offer clear and…

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.