UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS

FOR THE TENTH CIRCUIT

JERRY A. BENNETT,

Plaintiff-Appellant,

v.

JO ANNE B. BARNHART, Commissioner, Social Security Administration,

Defendant-Appellee.

No. 06-5030

(D.C. No. 03-CV-534-SAJ)

(N.D. Okla.)

ORDER AND JUDGMENT*

Before HENRY, ANDERSON, and McCONNELL, Circuit Judges.

Jerry Bennett appeals the district court's decision to deny an award of attorney's fees under the Social Security Act, 42 U.S.C. § 406(b)(1). We have jurisdiction under 42 U.S.C. § 405(g) and 28 U.S.C. § 1291, and we REVERSE the denial of fees and REMAND for further proceedings.

The Social Security Commissioner initially denied Mr. Bennett's application for disability insurance benefits and supplemental security income. The district court vacated the agency's decision and remanded for further proceedings. On remand, the administrative law judge issued a decision fully favorable to Mr. Bennett, and the agency calculated Mr. Bennett was due $33,233.20 in past-due disability insurance benefits.

Based on the award of past-due benefits, Mr. Bennett moved the district court to award attorney's fees under 42 U.S.C. § 406(b)(1). The district court denied the fee request, holding that § 406(b)(1) does not permit the court to make a fee award when the Commissioner awards past-due benefits on remand, as distinguished from the district court itself awarding benefits. The district court further concluded that the request was untimely filed under Fed. R. Civ. P. 54(d)(2).

While this appeal was pending, this court held that § 406(b)(1) does permit the district court to award attorneys' fees for work before the court when benefits are awarded at the agency level on remand. McGraw v. Barnhart, 450 F.3d 493, 503 (10th Cir. 2006).1 In that case, we also explained that Rule 54(d)(2) is not practical in SSA fee award cases when benefits are awarded on remand. Id. at 504. Thus, we approved of using Fed. R. Civ. P. 60(b)(6) to seek a § 406(b) fee award, noting that such a motion "should be filed within a reasonable time of the Commissioner's decision awarding benefits." Id. at 505. Thus, we REVERSE the district court's denial of attorney's fees and REMAND for further proceedings in light of McGraw.2 As in McGraw, we leave the questions of the reasonableness of counsel's requested fees and the timeliness of the fee motion to the district court's consideration in the first instance. See id. at 505.

Entered for the Court

Robert H. Henry

Circuit Judge