Ibarra v. Kijakazi, Acting Commissioner of Social Security

1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
United States District Court
Northern District of
 California
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA
EUREKA DIVISION
ALEJANDRO CESAR IBARRA,
Plaintiff,
v.
KILOLO KIJAKAZI, et al.,
Defendants.
Case No. 23-cv-02484-RMI
ORDER ON MOTION FOR
RECONSIDERATION
Re: Dkt. No. 23
Pending before the Court is Plaintiff’s Motion to Alter or Amend the Judgment of the
Court, (“Motion for Reconsideration”), requesting that the Court reconsider the Order Granting
Attorney’s Fees. (Pl.’s Mot., Dkt. 23; Order, Dkt. 22.) Plaintiff’s counsel filed the motion on his
behalf. Plaintiff argues that reconsideration is appropriate because he was not given fourteen days
to file his objections to his counsel’s fee requests before the Court granted the request; Plaintiff’s
counsel filed his response to the Motion for Reconsideration agreeing that Plaintiff should have
been given more time to file his objections but opposing the substantive objections to the fee
order. (Pl.’s Counsel’s Resp., Dkt. 24.) In addition to filing the motion on behalf of Plaintiff,
counsel also filed Plaintiff’s exhibits 26–30. (Pl.’s Exs., Dkt. 26.)
The motion for attorney’s fees was filed on October 31, 2025, and the Order granting the
motion for fees was issued on November 5, 2025; as such, Plaintiff was not given the requisite
fourteen days to file his response to his counsel’s motion for fees. On this basis, the Court
GRANTS the Motion for Reconsideration of the Order Granting Attorney’s Fees. Presently
submitted to the Court are Plaintiff’s 24-page motion objecting to the Order granting fees and 102
pages of exhibits labeled 26 through 30. However, it is not clear from the filings whether the
Case 1:23-cv-02484-RMI Document 27 Filed 11/14/25 Page 1 of 2

2
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
United States District Court
Northern District of California
Motion for Reconsideration includes the totality of Plaintiff’s objections to the request for
attorney’s fees under Section 406(b), and the Motion references many exhibits that have not been
provided to the Court. Plaintiff is therefore granted fourteen (14) days from the issuance of this
order to file any other documents responding to the motion for attorney’s fees and any exhibits
supporting those responses. Plaintiff may request that his counsel file these documents on his
behalf, as occurred for the Motion and exhibits 26–30, or he may file the documents himself by
mail to the following address:
Office of the Clerk
United States District Court
450 Golden Gate Ave., 16th Fl.
San Francisco, CA 94102-3489
Further information on filing papers with the Court can be found on the Northern District of
California’s website and at this link: https://cand.uscourts.gov/representing-yourself/pro-se-
handbook. Plaintiff’s counsel is ORDERED to serve this Order on Plaintiff and provide proof of
service to the Court.
Finally, Plaintiff has engaged in multiple ex parte communications with the Court’s
chambers through calls and emails to chambers staff. Plaintiff SHALL refrain from any further ex
parte communications while this matter proceeds.
IT IS SO ORDERED.
Dated: November 14, 2025
ROBERT M. ILLMAN
United States Magistrate Judge
Case 1:23-cv-02484-RMI Document 27 Filed 11/14/25 Page 2 of 2