(SS) Brisk v. Commissioner of Social Security
Opinion
Trial Court Opinion
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA 10 CARL. P. BRISK, Case No. 1:21-cv-00430-BAM Plaintiff, ORDER GRANTING MOTION FOR
AUTHORIZATION OF ATTORNEY’S
v. FEES UNDER 42 U.S.C. § 406(b) MARTIN O’MALLEY, Commissioner of (Doc. 27) Social Security,1 15 Defendant. 16 I. Introduction Jonathan Pena (“Counsel”), attorney for Carl P. Brisk (“Plaintiff”), filed a motion for attorney fees pursuant to 42 U.S.C. § 406(b) on February 29, 2024. (Doc. 27.) Although served with a copy of the motion, (Doc. 28), Plaintiff did not file a response. On March 7, 2024, the Commissioner filed a response to the motion, indicating the Commissioner neither supports nor opposes the request for attorney’s fees. (Doc. 29 at 3.) Having considered the motion and record in this case, the Court will grant the motion in the amount of $26,593.75, subject to an offset of $533.18 in fees already awarded pursuant to the Equal Access to Justice Act (“EAJA”), 28 U.S.C. § 2412. /// 27 1 Martin…