Plaintiffs Motion, Exhibit G.) The Commissioner does not dispute these rates and the Court finds them to be reasonable. Santos seeks a total of $11,073.10 in attorneys’ fees for 63.7 hours of attorney work. The Commissioner contends that the fees requested by Santos are excessive and should be reduced, arguing that other district courts in this Circuit have frequently found that twenty to forty hours reflects a reasonable expenditure of time in an average Social Security disability case. See, e.g., Hogan v. Astrue, 539 F.Supp.2d 680, 682 (W.D.N.Y.2008) (finding that an expenditure of 54 hours was “slightly excessive” considering size of administrative transcript, relatively simple history of case, and substantive issues involved); Cruz v. Apfel, 48 F.Supp.2d 226, 231 (E.D.N.Y.1999) (<HOLDING>). This standard, however, has not been used as
holding that to determine whether minimum wage law has been violated one must divide total weekly pay received by total number of hours worked holding that hours were excessive and that district court has the discretion and the duty to determine what a reasonable number of hours was holding that although this court affords broad discretion to the district court in determining the type of investigation necessary to determine juror bias the district court must provide the defendant a meaningful opportunity to prove the same holding that district court has discretion to determine whether it could reasonably be said that an emergency exists holding the district attorney is vested with the sole discretion as to what crimes will be charged and that discretion will not be disturbed absent a gross abuse of discretion