Harris v. Commissioner Social Security Administration

District Court, D. Oregon·Decided November 21, 2023·No. 6:22-cv-00529·Unknown

Opinion

INTHE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT THEDISTRICTOF OREGON NATALIED. HARRIS, Case No. 6:22-ev-00529-CL

Plaintiff, : ORDER FOR PAYMENT OF ATTORNEY VS. FEES PURSUANT TO EAJA COMMISSIONER, Social Security Administration,

Defendant.

Based upon the Stipulation of the parties, it is ORDERED that attorney fees in the amount □

of $7,624.12 are hereby awarded to Plaintiff, pursuant to the Equal Access to Justice Act (EAJA), _ 28 U.S.C. §.2412. Pursuant to Astrue v. Ratliff, 560 U.S. 586, 130 S: Ct. 2521, 2527 (2010), if the Commissioner confirms that Plaintiff owes no debt to the Government through the federal treasury offset program, payment of this award shall be made by check made payable and mailed ‘to Plaintiff’ s counsel, Katherine L. Eitenmiller, WELLS, MANNING, EITENMILLER &

_ TAYLOR, P.C., 474 Willamette Street, Eugene, Oregon 97401. If Plaintiff has such debt, the check for any remaining funds after offset shall be made out to Plaintiff and mailed to counsel’s address provided above, There are no costs or expenses to be paid nese .

-Dated this at day owed OQ : Zoo

. □ “—. “MARK D. CLARKE’ oe United States Magistrate Judge

Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI

Harris v. Commissioner Social Security Administration, (D. Or. 2023).

Harris v. Commissioner Social Security Administration (Harris v. Commissioner Social Security Administration) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.

Related

Astrue v. Ratliff
560 U.S. 586 (Supreme Court, 2010)