Case Name in Social Security Case - Unavailable

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF FLORIDA
FORT PIERCE DIVISION
CASE NO. 24-14242-CIV-CANNON/Augustin-Birch
JENNIFER ANNE FOSTER,
Plaintiff,
v.
FRANK BISIGNANO,
Commissioner of Social Security,
Defendant.
________________________________/
ORDER ACCEPTING MAGISTRATE JUDGE’S REPORT AND RECOMMENDATION
THIS CAUSE comes before the Court upon Magistrate Judge Augustin-Birch’s Report
and Recommendation (the “Report”), issued on October 7, 2025 [ECF No. 25]. 	The Report
recommends that Plaintiff’s Unopposed Motion for an award of attorney’s fees under the Equal
Access to Justice Act (“EAJA”) (the “Motion”) [ECF No. 23] be granted. No party filed objections
to the Report, and the time to do so has expired. Upon review of the Report and the Motion, the
Report [ECF No. 25] is ACCEPTED, and the Motion [ECF No. 23] is GRANTED for the reasons
stated in the Report.
***
To challenge the findings and recommendations of a magistrate judge, a party must file
specific written objections identifying the portions of the proposed findings and recommendation
to which objection is made. 	See Fed. R. Civ. P. 72(b)(3); Heath v. Jones, 863 F.2d 815, 822
(11th Cir. 1989); Macort v. Prem, Inc., 208 F. App’x 781, 784 (11th Cir. 2006). A district court
reviews de novo those portions of the report to which objection is made and may accept, reject,
or modify in whole or in part, the findings or recommendations made by the magistrate judge.
28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1). To the extent a party fails to object to parts of the magistrate judge’s report,
Case 2:24-cv-14242-AMC Document 26 Entered on FLSD Docket 03/02/2026 Page 1 of 2

CASE NO. 24-14242-CIV-CANNON/Augustin-Birch
2
the Court may accept the recommendation so long as there is no clear error on the face of the
record. Macort, 208 F. App’x at 784.
Following review, the Court finds no clear error in the Report. Accordingly, it is hereby
ORDERED AND ADJUDGED as follows:
1. 	The Report and Recommendation [ECF No. 25] is ACCEPTED.
2. 	The Motion [ECF No. 23] is GRANTED for the reasons stated in the Report.
3. 	Plaintiff is awarded $6,673.76 in attorney’s fees. If Plaintiff owes no debt subject
to Treasury Offset, the EAJA award will be made payable to Plaintiff’s attorney,
D. James Tree, based upon Plaintiff’s assignment. If Plaintiff owes a debt subject
to Treasury Offset, the EAJA award will be applied toward the debt, with the
remaining balance, if any, payable to Plaintiff and mailed to D. James Tree, 3711
Englewood Avenue, Yakima, Washington 98902
ORDERED in Chambers at Fort Pierce, Florida, this 2nd day of March 2026.
_________________________________
AILEEN M. CANNON
UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE
cc: 	counsel of record
Case 2:24-cv-14242-AMC Document 26 Entered on FLSD Docket 03/02/2026 Page 2 of 2