1 2 3 4 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 5 NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA 6 7 RICHARD R., Case No. 22-cv-05372-KAW

8 Plaintiff, ORDER GRANTING MOTION FOR 9 v. ATTORNEY'S FEES

10 KILOLO KIJAKAZI, Re: Dkt. No. 25 11 Defendant.

12 13 Plaintiff brought this action seeking review of a final decision of the Commissioner of 14 Social Security (“Commissioner” or “Defendant”). Following the Court’s remand of the case for 15 further proceedings, the Commissioner granted Plaintiff’s application for benefits, entitling 16 Plaintiff to $113,643.00 in retroactive benefits. (Mot. for Attorney’s Fees at 1, Dkt. No. 25; see 17 also Exh. 3.) Plaintiff’s counsel, Katherine Siegfried, now brings a motion for attorney’s fees 18 under

(d)(2)(B), seeking an award of $28,410.75. (Mot. for Attorney’s Fees at 19 1.) The Court deems the matter suitable for disposition without hearing pursuant to Civil Local 20 Rule 7-1(b). Having considered the papers filed by the parties and the relevant legal authority, the 21 Court GRANTS the motion, for the reasons set forth below. 22 I. BACKGROUND 23 On January 17, 2020, Plaintiff applied for Title II benefits. (Administrative Record 24 (“AR”) 56.) The Social Security Administration (“SSA”) denied Plaintiff’s application, and on 25 September 21, 2022, Plaintiff commenced an action for judicial review pursuant to

405(g). On October 17, 2023, the Court granted Plaintiff’s motion for summary judgment and 27 remanded for further proceedings. (Dkt. No. 21 at 7.) On December 27, 2023, the parties 1 (“EAJA”) in the amount of $10,500.00. (Dkt. No. 23.) The $10,500.00 was received by counsel. 2 (See Mot. for Attorney’s Fees at 3.) 3 On December 12, 2024, Plaintiff’s counsel filed the instant motion for attorney’s fees, 4 seeking a fee of $28,410.75 (25% of the retroactive benefits). (Mot. for Attorney’s Fees at 1.) 5 Plaintiff’s counsel’s request is based on a contingent fee agreement with Plaintiff that permits 6 Plaintiff’s counsel to seek 25% of past-due benefits for work performed before the courts. (Mot. 7 for Attorney’s Fees, Exh. 4.) The Commissioner filed a response on December 17, 2024, taking 8 no position on the reasonableness of the request. (Def.’s Resp. at 4, Dkt. No. 36.) No reply was 9 filed, nor were any objections received from individual Plaintiff. 10 II. LEGAL STANDARD 11

(d) governs the payment of representative fees for Supplemental Security 12 Income benefits. These regulations track those for the award of attorney’s fees under

406.

(d)(2)(A) (“The provisions of section 206 [

] . . . shall apply 14 to this part”). 15

(b) governs fees for the representation of a claimant before the court, 16 which is not to exceed “25 percent of the total of the past-due benefits to which the claimant is 17 entitled by reason of such judgment . . . .”

(b)(1)(A). When reviewing a motion 18 for attorney’s fees, the Court begins its analysis “by looking first to the contingent-fee agreement, 19 then testing it for reasonableness.” Gisbrecht v. Barnhart,

(2002). In assessing 20 the reasonableness of the fee agreement, the Court considers “‘the character of the representation 21 and the results the representative achieved.’” Crawford v. Astrue,

(9th Cir. 22 2009) (quoting Gisbrecht,

). Thus, the Court may apply a downward adjustment in 23 the event of “substandard performance, delay, or benefits that are not in proportion to the time 24 spent on the case.”

While the Court is not to start with a lodestar analysis, it may use the 25 lodestar analysis as an aid (but not a baseline) to assess the reasonableness of the fee.

26 III. DISCUSSION 27 Plaintiff signed a contingent fee agreement in which Plaintiff agreed to pay “up to twenty- 1 Plaintiff’s counsel seeks $28,410.75 or 25% of the $113,643.00 awarded to Plaintiff in past-due 2 benefits. (Mot. for Attorney’s Fees at 1.) 3 The Court finds that the amount sought by Plaintiff's counsel is reasonable. First, the 4 results obtained by Plaintiff’s counsel were good, as the Court ordered that the case be remanded 5 for further proceedings, resulting in the award of benefits to Plaintiff. (See Dkt. No. 22.) Second, 6 the record reveals no undue delay or substandard performance that would warrant a downward 7 adjustment. Plaintiff’s counsel requested only one extension of time for thirty days. (Dkt. No. 8 11.) 9 Third, the amount sought is consistent with the cap set by Congress in § 406(b) and is not 10 disproportionate to the time spent by Plaintiff’s counsel in this action. Plaintiff’s counsel spent 11 46.35 hours on this case, for an effective rate of $612.96. (Mot. for Attorney’s Fees, Exh. 2.) This 12 rate is comparable with rates awarded by other courts in this district. Compare with Goodbar v. 13 Colvin, Case No. 11-cv-4572-SI,

, at *4 (N.D. Cal. Nov. 2, 2015) 14 (approving effective hourly rate of $772.09); see also Crawford,

(affirming 15 reasonableness of effectively hourly rates of $519, $875, and $902). Further, the Ninth Circuit has 16 recognized that in assessing reasonableness, the court should not start with the lodestar method 17 because “the lodestar method tends to under-compensate attorneys for the risk they undertook in 18 representing their clients and does not account for the fact that the statute limits attorneys’ fees to 19 a percentage of past-due benefits and allows no recovery from future benefits, which may far 20 exceed the past-due benefits awarded.” Crawford,

. While the case involves 21 over three years of backpay, there is no indication that Plaintiff’s counsel was responsible for the 22 delay. Thus, considering the three Crawford factors, the Court finds that the amount sought by 23 Plaintiff’s counsel is reasonable. 24 /// 25 /// 26 /// 27 /// 1 IV. CONCLUSION 2 For the reasons stated above, the motion for attorney’s fees is GRANTED. The Court 3 awards fees in the amount of $28,410.75. Plaintiff’s counsel shall refund to Plaintiff the 4 || $10,500.00 in EAJA fees that Plaintiffs counsel previously received. 5 IT IS SO ORDERED. 6 Dated: January 10, 2025 . 7 Kee A. J STMORE United States Magistrate Judge 8 9 10 11 a 12

15 16

= 17

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