1 2 3 4 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 5 NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA 6 7 CAROLYNNE A. WINSTON, Case No. 19-cv-03306-SVK

8 Plaintiff, ORDER ON PETITION FOR 9 v. ATTORNEY'S FEES PURSUANT TO

(B) 10 ANDREW M. SAUL, Re: Dkt. No. 21 11 Defendant.

12 This case began as an appeal by Plaintiff Carolynne Winston of a decision by Defendant, 13 the Commissioner of Social Security, denying Plaintiff’s claim for disability benefits. After 14 Plaintiff filed a motion for summary judgment, the parties stipulated to remand the case for further 15 proceedings. Dkt. 14, 15. The Court granted the stipulation and entered judgment based on that 16 stipulation and order. Dkt. 16, 17. Following entry of judgment, the Court awarded Plaintiff 17 $6321.70 in attorney’s fees and expenses under the Equal Access to Justice Act,

18 (“EAJA”). Dkt. 20. 19 On remand, Plaintiff was awarded past-due benefits of approximately $95,000.00, plus other benefits. See Dkt. 21-4; Dkt. 21-2 ¶¶ 4-5. 20 Now before the Court is the petition of Plaintiff’s counsel, Katherine Siegfried 21 (“Counsel”), who represented Plaintiff in both the judicial proceedings and in administrative 22 proceedings on remand, for an award of attorney’s fees of $24,083.90. Dkt. 21. This application 23 is made pursuant to

(b) and the parties’ contingent fee agreement. Counsel’s 24 petition includes a declaration from Plaintiff supporting Counsel’s request for attorney’s fees. 25 Dkt. 21-2. The Government filed a response taking no position on the attorney’s fees petition. 26 Dkt. 22. 27 1 the fees sought are reasonable, and therefore GRANTS the petition and awards Counsel 2 $24,083.90 in attorney’s fees. 3 I. FACTUAL BACKGROUND 4 On February 3, 2020, Plaintiff and Counsel entered into a Fee Agreement. Dkt. 21-3. The 5 Fee Agreement contains an agreement by Plaintiff to pay Counsel “a fee of up to twenty-five 6 percent (25%) of all past-due benefits awarded in my case out of past-due benefits, if we win 7 my case.” Dkt. 21-3 at 1 (emphasis in original). 8 The Social Security Administration withheld $24,083.90 of Plaintiff’s past-due benefits to 9 ensure there were sufficient funds available to pay any attorney’s fees award. Dkt. 21-4 at 3; Dkt. 10 21-1 ¶ 6. The withheld amount represents 25% of the past-due benefits. Dkt. 21-4 at 3; Dkt. 21-1 11 ¶ 6. 12 Counsel now requests that the Court award her $24,083.90 in fees. Dkt. 21. Counsel has 13 submitted time records reflecting 30.6 hours of her time for work performed in connection with 14 the district court proceedings. Dkt. 21-1 ¶ 10; Dkt. 21-5. Counsel also states that she spent an 15 additional 13.6 hours representing Plaintiff in administrative proceedings. Dkt. 21-1 ¶ 11. 16 The declaration submitted by Counsel states that if she is awarded Section 406(b) fees, she 17 will reimburse Plaintiff the EAJA award of $6231.70. Dkt. 21-1 ¶ 12. In its response to 18 Counsel’s petition for attorney’s fees, the Government discusses the fact that Plaintiff was 19 awarded EAJA fees and states that “should the Court find that any amount of Counsel’s [current 20 fees] request under § 406(b) is reasonable, it would award Counsel § 406(b) fees and order Counsel to 21 refund to Plaintiff the March 11, 2020 … EAJA fees that Counsel previously accepted for work before 22 this Court.” Dkt. 22 at 3. 23 II. LEGAL STANDARD 24 Section 406(b) of the Social Security Act governs Counsel’s request for fees. Under that 25 provision, “[w]henever a court renders a judgment favorable to a claimant under this subchapter 26 who was represented before the court by an attorney, the court may determine and allow as part of 27 its judgment a reasonable fee for such representation, not in excess of 25 percent of the total of the 1 § 406(b)(1)(A). A court may award such a fee even if the award of past-due benefits resulted not 2 from the court’s judgment, but from remand proceedings ordered by the court. McCullough v. 3 Berryhill, No. 16-cv-00625-BLF,

, at *1 (N.D. Cal. Nov. 15, 2018). The 4 attorney’s fees awarded under Section 406(b) are paid by the claimant out of the past-due benefits 5 awarded, not by the Government.

6 Attorneys specializing in Social Security cases “routinely enter into contingent-fee 7 agreements specifying that the fee will be 25% of any past-due benefits recovered, thus providing 8 the attorney the statutory maximum of fees of the representation is successful.” McCullough, 9

, at *1 (citing Crawford v. Astrue,

(9th Cir. 2009)). 10 III. DISCUSSION 11 As required by

(b)(1)(A), the Court must determine whether Counsel’s 12 request for fees of $24,083.90 is reasonable. In its notice of award, the Social Security 13 Administration represented that this amount represented 25 percent of past-due benefits payable to 14 Plaintiff. Dkt. 21-4 at 3. Plaintiff agrees that this amount is “what we agreed to at the start of my 15 case.” Dkt. 21-2 ¶ 6. 16 Nothing in the record suggests that Counsel’s performance was substandard or that 17 Counsel delayed proceedings in an effort to increase the amount of fees awarded. After Counsel 18 filed a summary judgment motion, she obtained the Commissioner’s stipulation to remand the 19 case. On remand, Plaintiff won a substantial award of past-due benefits and ongoing benefits. 20 Thus, Counsel obtained a favorable result for Plaintiff in an efficient manner. 21 The fee award of $24,083.90 for 44.2 hours of Counsel’s work in this district court case 22 and on remand translates to an hourly rate of approximately $545. Courts in this circuit have 23 awarded fees under Section 406(b) with effective hourly rates ranging between $1,000.00 and 24 $1,500.00. See McCullough,

, at *2 and cases cited therein. In this context, the 25 fees sought by Counsel are reasonable. 26 Accordingly, the Court concludes that Counsel’s request for $24,083.90 under Section 27 406(b) is reasonable under the facts of this case. Counsel is required to reimburse Plaintiff for all 1 IV. CONCLUSION 2 For the reasons discussed above, the Court ORDERS as follows: 3 (1) Counsel’s motion for attorney’s fees under

(b) is 4 GRANTED in the amount of $24,083.90; and 5 (2) Counsel must refund Plaintiff the sum of $6231.70 previously awarded as 6 EAJA fees. 7 SO ORDERED. 8 Dated: January 25, 2021 9 10 Seam veut SUSAN VAN KEULEN 11 United States Magistrate Judge a 12

14 © 15

16

17

Zz 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28