Matos
Matos v. Saul
Opinion
trial_court Opinion
1 2 3 4 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 5 NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA 6 7 HILDA MATOS, Case No. 19-cv-02505-TSH
8 Plaintiff,
ORDER GRANTING MOTION FOR
9 v. ATTORNEY’S FEES
10 ANDREW M. SAUL, Re: Dkt. No. 19 11 Defendant.
12 13 I. INTRODUCTION 14 Plaintiff’s counsel, Katherine Siegfried, moves for attorney’s fees pursuant to the Equal 15 Access to Justice Act (“EAJA”), 28 U.S.C. § 2412(d), for representing Plaintiff in her successful 16 appeal of the Commissioner’s denial of social security disability benefits. ECF No. 19. The 17 Commissioner filed an opposition (ECF. No. 20) and Plaintiff filed a reply (ECF No. 21). Having 18 considered the parties’ positions, relevant legal authority, and the record in this case, the Court 19 GRANTS the motion for the reasons set forth below. 20 II. BACKGROUND 21 On March 7, 2016, Plaintiff filed a claim for Disability Insurance Benefits for a 22 combination of mental and physical impairments, including depression…