E.P. v. Bisignano
- Virginia Demarchi
- 5:22-cv-05830
- U.S. District Court · Northern District of California
- 4
In E.P. v. Bisignano, Judge Demarchi granted counsel’s fee motion and awarded $35,200 under federal Social Security law after a favorable remand.
Francesco Benavides received a $35,200 attorney-fee award. E.P.’s past-due Social Security benefits and the previously awarded $8,200 in Equal Access to Justice Act fees were relevant to the court’s decision, and the court did not require Benavides to refund the $8,200.
What happened
In E.P. v. Bisignano, the court had previously remanded E.P.’s Social Security case for further proceedings after granting in part and denying in part the parties’ summary judgment motions. The agency later found E.P. disabled since August 31, 2018 and awarded $177,954 in past-due benefits.
E.P.’s lawyer, Francesco Benavides, requested $35,200 under a fee law that permits awards of up to 25% of past-due benefits when a lawyer successfully represents a claimant in federal court. The court found the requested amount reasonable, noting the contingency-fee agreement, the favorable result, the hours worked, the lack of delay, and the risk counsel accepted. The court also found no need to require counsel to refund the previously awarded $8,200 in Equal Access to Justice Act fees because counsel said those funds had been used to offset E.P.’s debt.
Judge Virginia K. DeMarchi granted Benavides’s motion and awarded him $35,200 in fees. The opinion does not report an objection from E.P. or the Commissioner.
The detailed version
- E.P. v. Bisignano · No. 5:22-cv-05830
- Virginia Demarchi
- Dec. 31, 2025
Background
E.P. brought this action seeking review of an unfavorable Social Security decision. The court previously granted in part and denied in part E.P.’s and the Commissioner’s respective summary judgment motions, remanded the matter for further administrative proceedings, and entered judgment for E.P. The court later approved the parties’ stipulation awarding $8,200 in attorney fees under the Equal Access to Justice Act.
After remand, the Commissioner issued a fully favorable decision in August 2025, finding that E.P. had been disabled since August 31, 2018. In November 2025, the Social Security Administration notified E.P. that she was entitled to $177,954 in past-due benefits.
Fee motion
E.P.’s attorney, Francesco Benavides, moved for fees under 42 U.S.C. § 406(b). He sought $35,200 based on a contingency-fee agreement providing for a fee equal to 25% of E.P.’s past-due benefits awarded after a successful appeal. The court noted that § 406(b) permits a reasonable fee of no more than 25% of past-due benefits and requires the court to independently review the fee arrangement for reasonableness.
The court found the requested fee reasonable. The agreement complied with the statutory 25% limit, Benavides successfully pursued E.P.’s federal-court appeal, and E.P. received substantial past-due benefits. The court found no undue delay or substandard representation. It also reviewed Benavides’s time records, which showed 34.6 hours of work, but explained that a lodestar calculation—an hours-times-rate method—does not control § 406(b) fee review. The court also considered the contingency risk Benavides accepted and the fact that he said he had not received the earlier $8,200 EAJA award because the Treasury Department used it to offset a debt owed by E.P.
Disposition
The court found no need to require Benavides to refund the earlier $8,200 EAJA award to E.P. It granted Benavides’s motion for fees under 42 U.S.C. § 406(b) and awarded him $35,200.
The order was signed by Virginia K. DeMarchi, United States Magistrate Judge.
Read the full 4-page opinion on CourtListener, the free public archive maintained by the Free Law Project.