2:25-cv-00270•Butler v. Commissioner of Social Security
Full text
United States District Court Southern District of Texas ENTERED June 18, 2026 Nathan Ochsner, Clerk Case 2:25-cv-00270 Document 18 Filed 06/18/26 in TXSD Page 1 of 2
Case 2:25-cv-00270 Document 18 Filed 06/18/26 in TXSD Page 2 of 2
OCR transcription for search; preserved printed pages are authoritative
Case 2:25-cv-00270 Documenti18_ Filed 06/18/26 in TXSD Page1of2 United States District Court Southem District of Texas ENTERED June 18, 2026 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT Nathan Ochsner, Clerk SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF TEXAS CORPUS CHRISTI DIVISION GUY WILLIAM BUTLER, § Plaintiff, V. CIVIL ACTION NO. 2:25-CV-00270 FRANK BISIGNANO, Defendant. ORDER ADOPTING MEMORANDUM & RECOMMENDATION Before the Court is Magistrate Judge Julie K. Hampton’s Memorandum and Recommendation (““M&R”). (D.E. 17). The M&R recommends that the Court grant Plaintiffs motion for attorney fees, (D.E. 16). The parties were provided proper notice of, and the opportunity to object to, the Magistrate Judge’s M&R. See 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1); FED. R. Civ. P. 72(b); General Order No. 2002-13. No objection has been filed. When no timely objection has been filed, the district court need only determine whether the Magistrate Judge’s M&R is clearly erroneous or contrary to law. United States v. Wilson, 864 F.2d 1219, 1221 (Sth Cir. 1989) (per curiam); Powell v. Litton Loan Servicing, L.P., No. 4:14-CV-02700, 2015 WL 3823141, at *1 (S.D. Tex. June 18, 2015) (Harmon, J) (citation omitted). Having reviewed the proposed findings and conclusions of the Magistrate Judge, the filings of the parties, the record, and the applicable law, and finding that the M&R is not clearly erroneous or contrary to law, the Court ADOPTS the M&R in its entirety. (D.E. 17). Accordingly, the Court GRANTS Plaintiff's motion for attorney fees, (D.E. 16), and ORDERS the following: 1/2 AUTHENTICATED U.S. GOVERNMENT INFORMATION GPO Case 2:25-cv-00270 Documenti18_ Filed 06/18/26 in TXSD Page 2 of 2 1. Plaintiffs attorney of record is AWARDED the sum of $7,500.00 in attorney fees and $405.000 in costs. 2. The attorney fee award SHALL be made payable to Plaintiff, Guy William Butler, and mailed in care of his attorney, David F. Chermol. 3. Defendant’s payment of this award BARS any and all claims that Plaintiff may have relating to EAJA fees and expenses in compensation with this action. 4. Defendant’s payment of this award is without prejudice to Plaintiffs right to seek attorney fees under § 206(b) of the Social Security Act, 42 U.S.C. § 406(b), subject to the offset provisions of the EAJA. ; /| a J / j i SO ORDERED. / | / / \ Vala \A DAVIPSS. MORALES UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE Signed: Corpus Christi, Texas June 752026 2/2
Wondering how this text applies to your situation?
Free consultation, no commitment
Describe your situation. Our team will contact you by email about your consultation.
Continue your research in ChatGPT or Claude
Connect Omnilex to search the legal corpus from your AI assistant.