UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT July 08, 2020 SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF TEXAS David J. Bradley, Clerk CORPUS CHRISTI DIVISION

JORGE L ROSALES, § § Plaintiff, § VS. § CIVIL ACTION NO. 2:17-CV-224 § NANCY A BERRYHILL, § § Defendant. §

ORDER ADOPTING MEMORANDUM AND RECOMMENDATION

On June 15, 2020, United States Magistrate Judge Julie K. Hampton issued her “Memorandum and Recommendation” (D.E. 24), recommending an award of attorney’s fees to Plaintiff’s counsel. The parties were provided proper notice of, and opportunity to object to, the Magistrate Judge’s Memorandum and Recommendation. FED. R. CIV. P. 72(b);

(b)(1); General Order No. 2002-13. No objections have been timely filed. When no timely objection to a magistrate judge’s memorandum and recommendation is filed, the district court need only satisfy itself that there is no clear error on the face of the record and accept the magistrate judge’s memorandum and recommendation. Guillory v. PPG Industries, Inc.,

(5th Cir. 2005) (citing Douglass v. United Services Auto Ass’n,

(5th Cir. 1996)). Having reviewed the findings of fact and conclusions of law set forth in the Magistrate Judge’s Memorandum and Recommendation (D.E. 24), and all other relevant documents in the record, and finding no clear error, the Court ADOPTS as its own the findings and conclusions of the Magistrate Judge. Accordingly, Honig’s Petition to Obtain Approval of a Fee for Representing a Social Security Claimant (D.E. 20) is GRANTED. The Court FINDS that he is entitled to a fee award of $10,825.58. Further, the Court ORDERS Honig to refund to his client the $3,450.42 award he previously received under the EAJA because it is the lesser of the two awards. ORDERED this 8th day of July, 2020.

Jbl GONZALES RAMOS UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE

2/2