Pizano

Pizano v. Berryhill

Good Law
United States District Court, Northern District of CaliforniaJuly 24, 20205:17-cv-03030California1,406 words

Opinion

Trial Court Opinion

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA SAN JOSE DIVISION 7 JUAN ANTONIO PIZANO, Case No. 17-cv-03030-HRL

Plaintiff,

ORDER GRANTING PLAINTIFF’S

v. COUNSEL’S MOTION FOR FEES

ANDREW M. SAUL, Re: Dkt. No. 35 Defendant.

13 I. BACKGROUND In this Social Security appeal,1 the Court granted in part plaintiff Juan Antonio Pizano’s motion for summary judgment, remanded the case for further agency proceedings, and entered judgment accordingly. Dkt. Nos. 30, 31. The Court subsequently approved the parties’ stipulation for an award of attorney’s fees in the amount of $3,500 to Mr. Pizano’s counsel, Marc Kalagian, pursuant to the Equal Access to Justice Act (“EAJA”), 28 U.S.C. § 2142. Dkt. No. 34. On remand, the Social Security Administration concluded that Mr. Pizano is disabled within the meaning of the Social Security Act (“Act”) and awarded him $57,369 in past-due disability benefits. Dkt. No. 35 at ECF 11, ¶ 4, Dkt. No. 35-3; Dkt. No.…

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.