Maserang

Maserang v. Saul

Good Law
United States District Court, Southern District of CaliforniaMay 23, 20243:19-cv-02010California1,058 words

Opinion

Trial Court Opinion

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA 10 Zscaquline M., Case No.: 19-cv-2010-DEB

Plaintiff,

ORDER GRANTING PLAINTIFF’S

v. COUNSEL’S MOTION FOR

ATTORNEY FEES PURSUANT TO

MARTIN O’MALLEY, Acting 42 U.S.C. § 406(b) Commissioner of Social Security,1 15 Defendant. [DKT. NO. 26]

17 Before the Court is Plaintiff’s Counsel’s Motion for Attorney Fees Pursuant to 42 U.S.C. § 406(b). Dkt. No. 26. Neither Plaintiff nor the Commissioner oppose the Motion. For the reasons discussed below, the Court GRANTS the Motion. I. BACKGROUND Plaintiff Zscaquline M. filed this action seeking review of the Commissioner of Social Security’s (“Commissioner”) denial of her applications for disability insurance benefits and Supplemental Security Income. Dkt. No. 1. The Court reversed the denial of benefits and remanded the case for further proceedings. Dkt. No. 23. Pursuant to the parties’ joint motion, the Court awarded Plaintiff $4,500 in attorney fees under the Equal…

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.