Court, Explained
U.S. Federal District Courts
←Back to docket
S.D.N.Y.Procedural orderFiled Oct. 6, 2023

Jimenez v. Commissioner of Social Security

Judge
Kenneth Karas
Docket
7:21-cv-02030
Court
U.S. District Court · Southern District of New York
Pages
4
Fee PetitionSocial Security
In one sentence

In Jimenez v. Commissioner of Social Security, Judge Karas granted Jimenez’s counsel $13,087 in attorney’s fees under the Equal Access to Justice Act.

Who this affects

Jimenez’s counsel, James M. Baker, is to receive $13,087 from the Commissioner of Social Security under the Equal Access to Justice Act.

What happened

Sandra Jimenez sued the Commissioner of Social Security on behalf of her son, D.S.J., seeking review of the denial of his child Supplemental Security Income application. The court had previously ordered further administrative proceedings and entered judgment for Jimenez.

Jimenez then requested $13,087 in attorney’s fees and expenses under the Equal Access to Justice Act. A magistrate judge recommended granting the request, and neither side objected to that recommendation.

In Jimenez v. Commissioner of Social Security, Judge Kenneth M. Karas found no clear error, adopted the recommendation in full, and granted Jimenez’s motion. The court ordered the Commissioner to pay the $13,087 to Jimenez’s attorney, James M. Baker.

The detailed version

For law students, journalists, and other readers who want the full reasoning

Case
Jimenez v. Commissioner of Social Security · No. 7:21-cv-02030
Judge
Kenneth Karas
Date
Oct. 6, 2023

Background

Sandra Jimenez brought the underlying case under 42 U.S.C. § 405(g), asking the court to review the Commissioner of Social Security’s final decision denying her son D.S.J.’s application for child Supplemental Security Income. An administrative law judge had found that D.S.J. was not disabled, and the Social Security Administration’s Appeals Council denied review.

Jimenez commenced the federal case without a lawyer. Attorney James M. Baker later appeared on her behalf. The Commissioner moved for judgment on the pleadings, and Jimenez filed a cross-motion. Magistrate Judge Andrew E. Krause recommended granting Jimenez’s motion in part and denying it in part, denying the Commissioner’s motion, remanding the case for further administrative proceedings under 42 U.S.C. § 405(g), and entering judgment for Jimenez. Judge Karas adopted that recommendation, and judgment was entered for Jimenez on September 7, 2022.

Attorney’s-Fee Request

Jimenez sought $13,087 in attorney’s fees and expenses under the Equal Access to Justice Act, 28 U.S.C. § 2412. The Commissioner opposed the request. Magistrate Judge Krause later issued a report and recommendation recommending that the fee motion be granted. Neither party filed objections.

Court’s Analysis

Because no objections were filed, Judge Karas reviewed the fee recommendation for clear error. After reviewing the recommendation and Jimenez’s fee motion, the court found no substantive error, including no clear error, and adopted the recommendation in full.

Disposition

The court ordered that the fee recommendation dated May 31, 2023, be adopted in its entirety. It granted Jimenez’s motion for attorney’s fees and ordered the Commissioner to pay James M. Baker $13,087. The court also directed the Clerk to terminate the pending fee motion.

The authoritative version

Read the full 4-page opinion on CourtListener, the free public archive maintained by the Free Law Project.

Open opinion PDF →
Summary written with AI assistance. See how summaries are made. Spot something wrong? Tell us.