Case Name in Social Security Case - Unavailable

1
IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
FOR THE MIDDLE DISTRICT OF GEORGIA
MACON DIVISION
H.P.F., 	:
:
Plaintiff, 	:
:
v. 	: 	No. 5:24-cv-209-CHW
:
COMMISSIONER OF 	: 	Social Security Appeal
SOCIAL SECURITY 	:
:
Defendant. 	:
:
ORDER
Before the Court is Plaintiff’s motion for an award of attorney’s fees pursuant to the Equal
Access to Justice Act (“EAJA”), 28 U.S.C. § 2412, following this Court’s order remanding the
case to the Commissioner pursuant to sentence four of 42 U.S.C. § 405(g). (Docs. 14–16). The
Commissioner agreed that Plaintiff was entitled to attorney’s fees but objected to a portion of the
requested fees. (Doc. 17). Plaintiff replied to the Commissioner’s objections. (Doc. 18).
Plaintiff requests attorney’s fees in the amount of $8,985.47 for 6.7 hours of paralegal work
and 32.5 hours of attorney work. (Doc. 16-1). Plaintiff’s fee calculations appear to comport with
the Court's formula established in Hartage v. Astrue, No. 4:09-cv-48, 2011 WL 1123401 (M.D.
Ga. 2011). The Commissioner has objected to specific tasks, including 5.8 hours of paralegal work
and the hourly rate for paralegal work, which would reduce the award to $8,237.97.1 The disputed
time covers fees for, what the Commissioner alleges is, non-compensable work. (Doc. 17).
First, the Court agrees with Plaintiff that $125 per hour is an appropriate rate for paralegal
work. In support of this assertion, Plaintiff provided the Court with the 2024 National Utilization
1 The Commissioner did not provide the new requested amount to the Court.
Case 5:24-cv-00209-CHW Document 19 Filed 02/04/26 Page 1 of 2

2
and Compensation Report produced by the National Association of Legal Assistants. (Doc. 18-3).
That report states that the average hourly billing rate for paralegals in the Southeast region in 2024
was $125. (Id., p. 34). The Commissioner states that a more appropriate range is between $75 and
$100, but the Commissioner does not provide any support for this assertion. (Doc. 17, p. 8).
Second, the Court agrees that Plaintiff requests non-compensable fees but does not find that all the
Commissioner’s suggested reductions are warranted. Specifically, the Court finds the July 1, 2024,
.3 hours for “Executed FDC contract and other rep documents reviewed for proper completion”
and the September 9, 2024, 1.7 hours for “Combine, OCR and live bookmark Federal Court
transcript (1, 735 pages)” to be non-compensable clerical tasks. The remaining paralegal entries
are compensable and not the type of solely clerical review that other courts have excluded from
fee awards. See Harriott v. Comm'r, Soc. Sec. Admin., No. 2:23-CV-120-JCF, 2025 WL 2848605
(N.D. Ga. Feb. 20, 2025). Therefore, reducing Plaintiff’s fee award by $250 for two hours of
clerical work billed at paralegal rates is appropriate.
Plaintiff’s motion (Doc. 16) is GRANTED with the above-noted exceptions. It is hereby
ORDERED that Plaintiff is awarded $8,735.47 in attorney’s fees under the EAJA. This award
should be made payable to Plaintiff directly. Astrue v. Ratliff, 560 U.S. 586, 589 (2010). If,
however, the United States Department of the Treasury determines that Plaintiff does not owe a
federal debt, the Commissioner may accept Plaintiff’s assignment of EAJA attorney’s fees and
pay the awarded fees directly to Plaintiff’s counsel.
SO ORDERED, this 4th day of February, 2026.
s/ Charles H. Weigle
Charles H. Weigle
United States Magistrate Judge
Case 5:24-cv-00209-CHW Document 19 Filed 02/04/26 Page 2 of 2