Rinheart v. Commissioner of Social Security

1
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
WESTERN DISTRICT OF MICHIGAN
SOUTHERN DIVISION
RHONDA RINHEART,
Plaintiff,
v.
COMMISSIONER OF SOCIAL
Case No. 1:24-cv-1141
Hon. Hala Y. Jarbou
SECURITY,
Defendant.
/
REPORT AND RECOMMENDATION
Plaintiff filed this action to contest an Administrative Law Judge’s decision denying
benefits. 	The Court remanded this matter to the Commissioner pursuant to sentence four of 42
U.S.C. § 405(g). 	See Stipulation and Order (ECF No. 13). 	This matter is before the Court on
plaintiff’s unopposed motion for attorney fees under the Equal Access to Justice Act, 28 U.S.C. §
2412 (“EAJA”) (ECF No. 14) The parties have agreed to settle the motion in the amount of
$5,896.94 (PageID.1458).
I. 	Discussion
The EAJA provides in relevant part that “a court shall award to a prevailing party
other than the United States fees and other expenses . . . incurred by that party in any civil action
brought by or against the United States . . ., unless the court finds that the position of the United
States was substantially justified or that special circumstances make an award unjust.” 28 U.S.C.
§ 2412(d). 	The “fees and other expenses” authorized by the EAJA include reasonable attorney
fees. 28 U.S.C. § 2412(d)(2)(A). Eligibility for a fee award in a civil action “requires that (1) the
Case 1:24-cv-01141-HYJ-RSK ECF No. 15, PageID.<pageID> Filed 02/02/26 Page 1
of 3

2
claimant be a prevailing party, (2) the government’s position was not ‘substantially justified,’ and
(3) no special circumstances made an award unjust.” Marshall v. Commissioner of Social Security,
444 F.3d 837, 840 (6th Cir. 2006). Here, plaintiff has met the elements to be eligible for an EAJA
award, i.e., plaintiff is the prevailing party, the government does not contest plaintiff’s contention
that its position was not “substantially justified,” and no special circumstances exist in this case to
make an award unjust. 	Marshall, 444 F.3d at 840.
The next step is to determine the amount of reasonable attorney fees to be awarded
in this case. The EAJA provides that the amount of attorney fees awarded:
shall be based upon the prevailing market rates for the kind and quality of services
furnished, except that . . . (ii) attorney fees shall not be awarded in excess of $125
per hour unless the court determines that an increase in the cost of living or a special
factor, such as the limited availability of qualified attorneys for the proceedings
involved justifies a higher fee.
28 U.S.C. § 2412(d)(2)(A).
For reasons discussed in past orders, this Court has determined that the appropriate
hourly rate for Social Security Appeals is $204.75. The timesheets submitted to the Court reflect
a total of 26.8 attorney hours and 6.4 paralegal hours (ECF Nos. 14-6; 14-7). The time spent by
the attorney (26.8 hours) falls within the range of time typically spent on Social Security Appeals.1
Finally, an Affirmation and Waiver of Direct Payment of EAJA Fees was executed
by plaintiff (PageID.1489). Based on this document, plaintiff’s counsel asks that the EAJA fee be
paid directly to counsel. Counsel’s request should be denied. The manner in which the EAJA fee
is disbursed is left to the discretion of the Commissioner, not this Court. 	See Kerr for Kerr v.
1 See Flamboe v. Commissioner of Social Security, No. 1:12-cv-606, 2013 WL 1914546 at *2 (W.D. Mich. May 8,
2013) (“[a]lthough exceptions exist and each case is examined on its own merits, 40 hours generally marks the ‘outer
limits’ of a reasonable expenditure of time on this type of case”).
Case 1:24-cv-01141-HYJ-RSK ECF No. 15, PageID.<pageID> Filed 02/02/26 Page 2
of 3

3
Commissioner of Social Security, 874 F.3d 926, 935 (6th Cir. 2017) (“[A]ttorney fees ordered
under EAJA are to be paid to the prevailing party. . . We therefore conclude that although [the
prevailing plaintiff] had the right to assign her EAJA fee award to her lawyer, the award itself was
payable to [the plaintiff] and the Commissioner had discretion either to honor or not to honor the
assignment.”).
II. 	RECOMMENDATION
I respectfully recommend that the plaintiff’s motion (ECF No. 14) be GRANTED
IN PART and that defendant pay plaintiff attorney fees in the settled amount of $5,896.94.
Dated: February 2, 2026 	/s/ Ray Kent
Ray Kent
United States Magistrate Judge
ANY OBJECTIONS to this Report and Recommendation must be served and filed with the Clerk
of the Court within fourteen (14) days after service of the report. All objections and responses to
objections are governed by W.D. Mich. LCivR 72.3(b). Failure to serve and file written objections
within the specified time waives the right to appeal the District Court’s order. Thomas v. Arn, 474
U.S. 140 (1985); United States v. Walters, 638 F.2d 947 (6th Cir. 1981).
Case 1:24-cv-01141-HYJ-RSK ECF No. 15, PageID.<pageID> Filed 02/02/26 Page 3
of 3