Skinner v. Saul
Skinner v. Saul
Trial Court Opinion
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT EASTERN DISTRICT OF TEXAS No. 6:20-cv-00046 Ronesha Skinner, Plaintiff, V. Commissioner, Social Security Administration, Defendant.
ORDER Plaintiff Ronesha Skinner initiated this action seeking judicial re- view of the commissioner’s decision to deny social security benefits. Following a remand to the commissioner for further proceedings, plaintiff filed a motion for EAJA attorney’s fees. Doc. 18. The mo- tion was referred to United States Magistrate Judge K. Nicole Mitchell. The magistrate judge issued a report recommending that the mo- tion for fees be granted. Doc. 20. No party objected to the report and recommendation. When a party fails to object to a magistrate judge’s report, the court reviews the record only for clear error. See Douglass vy. United Servs. Auto. Ass’n,
79 F.3d 1415, 1420(5th Cir. 1996). Having reviewed the magistrate judge’s report, and being satis- fied that it contains no clear error, the court accepts its findings and recommendation. The court grants the motion for attorney’s fees. The commissioner shall pay fees incurred totaling $6,767.97, payable to plaintiff and mailed to plaintiff’s counsel of record.
So ordered by the court on January 10, 2022.
ji CAMPBELL BARKER United States District Judge
Reference
- Status
- Unknown