Arvizu v. Commissioner of Social Security Administration

D. Arizona

Arvizu v. Commissioner of Social Security Administration

DecidedJune 3, 2024

Docket4:21-cv-00028

StatusUnknown

This text of Arvizu v. Commissioner of Social Security Administration (Arvizu v. Commissioner of Social Security Administration) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering District Court, D. Arizona primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook

Arvizu v. Commissioner of Social Security Administration, (D. Ariz. 2024).

Pincite

Opinion

1 2 3 4 5 6 IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 7 FOR THE DISTRICT OF ARIZONA 8 9 Rafael Armando Arvizu, ) No. CV 21-28-TUC-JAS (LCK) ) 10 Plaintiff, ) ORDER ) 11 vs. ) ) 12 ) Martin O’Malley, Commissioner of the) 13 Social Security Administration, ) ) 14 Defendant. ) ) 15 16 Pending before the Court is a Report and Recommendation issued by United States 17 Magistrate Judge Kimmins. A review of the record reflects that the parties have not filed any 18 objections to the Report and Recommendation and the time to file objections has expired. 19 As such, the Court will not consider any objections or new evidence. 20 The Court has reviewed the record and concludes that Magistrate Judge Kimmins’ 21 recommendations are not clearly erroneous. See 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1); Fed. R. Civ. P. 72; 22 Johnson v. Zema Systems Corp., 170 F.3d 734, 739 (7th Cir. 1999); Conley v. Crabtree, 14 23 F. Supp. 2d 1203, 1204 (D. Or. 1998). 24 Accordingly, IT IS HEREBY ORDERED as follows: 25 (1) Magistrate Judge Kimmins’ Report and Recommendation (Doc. 52) is accepted and 26 adopted. The motion for attorney's fees (Doc. 48) is granted and Plaintiff's counsel is 27 awarded attorney's fees in the amount of $43,745.25, less the $11,939.12 previously received 28 1 |] under the EAJA, resulting in a net award of $31,806.13 to be paid out of Plaintiff's past due 2 || benefits, pursuant to 42 U.S.C. 406(b). 3 |] (2) The Clerk of the Court shall enter a judgment in accordance with this Order. 5 6 Dated this 31st day of May, 2024. 8 10 _\ e C. Axt > i Honorable James A. Soto 12 United States District Judge 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 -2-

Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI

1 2 3 4 5 6 IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 7 FOR THE DISTRICT OF ARIZONA 8 9 Rafael Armando Arvizu, ) No. CV 21-28-TUC-JAS (LCK) ) 10 Plaintiff, ) ORDER ) 11 vs. ) ) 12 ) Martin O’Malley, Commissioner of the) 13 Social Security Administration, ) ) 14 Defendant. ) ) 15 16 Pending before the Court is a Report and Recommendation issued by United States 17 Magistrate Judge Kimmins. A review of the record reflects that the parties have not filed any 18 objections to the Report and Recommendation and the time to file objections has expired. 19 As such, the Court will not consider any objections or new evidence. 20 The Court has reviewed the record and concludes that Magistrate Judge Kimmins’ 21 recommendations are not clearly erroneous. See 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1); Fed. R. Civ. P. 72; 22 Johnson v. Zema Systems Corp., 170 F.3d 734, 739 (7th Cir. 1999); Conley v. Crabtree, 14 23 F. Supp. 2d 1203, 1204 (D. Or. 1998). 24 Accordingly, IT IS HEREBY ORDERED as follows: 25 (1) Magistrate Judge Kimmins’ Report and Recommendation (Doc. 52) is accepted and 26 adopted. The motion for attorney's fees (Doc. 48) is granted and Plaintiff's counsel is 27 awarded attorney's fees in the amount of $43,745.25, less the $11,939.12 previously received 28 1 |] under the EAJA, resulting in a net award of $31,806.13 to be paid out of Plaintiff's past due 2 || benefits, pursuant to 42 U.S.C. 406(b). 3 |] (2) The Clerk of the Court shall enter a judgment in accordance with this Order. 5 6 Dated this 31st day of May, 2024. 8 10 _\ e C. Axt > i Honorable James A. Soto 12 United States District Judge 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 -2-

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

Arvizu v. Commissioner of Social Security Administration, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/arvizu-v-commissioner-of-social-security-administration-azd-2024.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack