DOCUMENT UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF NEW YORK DOC #:. : □□ □□□□□□□□□□□□□□□□□□□□□□□□□□□ DATE FILED: 192005 | MICHAEL MCVICKER, Plaintiff, 21-CV-07445 (SN) -against- OPINION & ORDER COMMISSIONER OF SOCIAL SECURITY, Defendant. □□□□□□□□□□□□□□□□□□□□□□□□□□□□□□□□□□□□□□□□□□□□□□

SARAH NETBURN, United States Magistrate Judge: Plaintiff filed this action pursuant to

(g), seeking review of a denial of social security benefits. The Court remanded the matter for further review by the Commissioner of Social Security, and the Court approved a stipulation and agreement awarding Plaintiff $10,350.00 in attorney’s fees under the Equal Access to Justice Act (the “EAJA”),

. Following the remand, Plaintiff received retroactive benefits from the Social Security Administration. Thereafter, on September 29, 2025, Plaintiff's counsel filed a motion for an award of attorney’s fees pursuant to

(b). See ECF No. 34. Section 406(b) permits the Court to approve “a reasonable fee . . . not in excess of 25 percent of the . . . past-due benefits” awarded to the plaintiff. Gisbrecht v. Barnhart,

(2002) (quoting

(b)(1)(A)). Because of the Commissioner’s unique role and expertise in this area, the Court orders the Commissioner to respond to Plaintiff's motion. In particular, the Court directs the Commissioner to address the question of whether the fees amount to an impermissible windfall.

See Diberardino v. Commissioner of Social Security, No. 17-cv-02868 (PKC),

(E.D.N.Y. Nov. 17, 2020). SO ORDERED.

SARAH — United States Magistrate Judge

DATED: New York, New York October 2, 2025