Johnson v. Acting Commissioner of Social Security Administration

S.D. Florida

Johnson v. Acting Commissioner of Social Security Administration

District Court, S.D. Florida·Decided October 3, 2025·No. 1:22-cv-21659·Unknown

Opinion

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF FLORIDA

CASE NO.: 1:22-cv-21659-GAYLES/TORRES

JAMES EDWARD JOHNSON,

Plaintiff,

v.

KILOLO KIJAKAZI, Acting Commissioner of Social Security Administration,

Defendant. ________________________________/

ORDER

THIS CAUSE comes before the Court on the Report and Recommendation of Magistrate Judge Edwin G. Torres (the “Report”). [ECF No. 33]. On August 18, 2025, Plaintiff’s counsel (“Petitioner”) filed a Motion for Attorney Fees (the “Motion”). [ECF No. 32]. On September 16, 2025, Judge Torres issued his Report recommending the Motion be granted, both by default (as no opposition had been filed) and on its merits. [ECF No. 33]. No party has objected to the Report. A district court may accept, reject, or modify a magistrate judge’s report and recommendation. 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1)(C). The objected portions of the report and recommendation are accorded de novo review if those objections “pinpoint the specific findings that the party disagrees with.” United States v. Schultz, 565 F.3d 1353, 1360 (11th Cir. 2009); see also Fed. R. Civ. P. 72(b)(3). Any portions of the report and recommendation to which no specific objection is made are reviewed only for clear error. Liberty Am. Ins. Grp., Inc. v. WestPoint Underwriters, L.L.C., 199 F. Supp. 2d 1271, 1276 (M.D. Fla. 2001); accord Macort v. Prem, Inc., 208 F. App’x 781, 784 (11th Cir. 2006). As no objections have been filed, the Court reviewed the Report for clear error. Finding no clear error, the Court agrees with Judge Torres’ findings and conclusion that the Motion should be granted. CONCLUSION Therefore, it is ORDERED AND ADJUDGED as follows: (1) The Report and Recommendation, [ECF No. 33], is ADOPTED in full; (2) Petitioner’s Motion [ECF No. 32] is GRANTED. Petitioner shall be awarded attorneys’ fees in the amount of $20,505.00. DONE AND ORDERED in Chambers at Miami, Florida, this 3rd day of October, 2025.

\ | j 4 / DARRIN P. GAYLES UNITED STATES DISTRACT JUDGE

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

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF FLORIDA

CASE NO.: 1:22-cv-21659-GAYLES/TORRES

JAMES EDWARD JOHNSON,

Plaintiff,

v.

KILOLO KIJAKAZI, Acting Commissioner of Social Security Administration,

Defendant. ________________________________/

ORDER

THIS CAUSE comes before the Court on the Report and Recommendation of Magistrate Judge Edwin G. Torres (the “Report”). [ECF No. 33]. On August 18, 2025, Plaintiff’s counsel (“Petitioner”) filed a Motion for Attorney Fees (the “Motion”). [ECF No. 32]. On September 16, 2025, Judge Torres issued his Report recommending the Motion be granted, both by default (as no opposition had been filed) and on its merits. [ECF No. 33]. No party has objected to the Report. A district court may accept, reject, or modify a magistrate judge’s report and recommendation. 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1)(C). The objected portions of the report and recommendation are accorded de novo review if those objections “pinpoint the specific findings that the party disagrees with.” United States v. Schultz, 565 F.3d 1353, 1360 (11th Cir. 2009); see also Fed. R. Civ. P. 72(b)(3). Any portions of the report and recommendation to which no specific objection is made are reviewed only for clear error. Liberty Am. Ins. Grp., Inc. v. WestPoint Underwriters, L.L.C., 199 F. Supp. 2d 1271, 1276 (M.D. Fla. 2001); accord Macort v. Prem, Inc., 208 F. App’x 781, 784 (11th Cir. 2006). As no objections have been filed, the Court reviewed the Report for clear error. Finding no clear error, the Court agrees with Judge Torres’ findings and conclusion that the Motion should be granted. CONCLUSION Therefore, it is ORDERED AND ADJUDGED as follows: (1) The Report and Recommendation, [ECF No. 33], is ADOPTED in full; (2) Petitioner’s Motion [ECF No. 32] is GRANTED. Petitioner shall be awarded attorneys’ fees in the amount of $20,505.00. DONE AND ORDERED in Chambers at Miami, Florida, this 3rd day of October, 2025.

\ | j 4 / DARRIN P. GAYLES UNITED STATES DISTRACT JUDGE

Johnson v. Acting Commissioner of Social Security Administration, (S.D. Fla. 2025).

Pincite

Johnson v. Acting Commissioner of Social Security Administration (Johnson v. Acting Commissioner of Social Security Administration) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.

Opinion

Related