Peters v. Commissioner of Social Security

Opinion

1 2 U.S. MAGISTRATE JUDGE THERESA L. FRICKE

8 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT WESTERN DISTRICT OF WASHINGTON 9 TACOMA DIVISION

10 SAMUEL J. PETERS, Civil No. 3:20-CV-05881-TLF

11 Plaintiff,

12 vs. ORDER FOR EAJA FEES 13 COMMISSIONER OF SOCIAL SECURITY,

14 Defendant.

15 For the reasons set forth in the parties’ stipulated motion for attorney fees under the Equal 16 Access to Justice Act (EAJA), 28 U.S.C. § 2412, et seq., and good cause shown, IT IS HEREBY 17 ORDERED AS FOLLOWS: 18 1. Plaintiff is here by awarded $7,303.51 in fees and $6.50 in expenses under the EAJA. 19 Under Astrue v. Ratliff, 130 S. Ct. 2521, 2528-29 (2010), EAJA fees awarded by this 20 Court belong to the Plaintiff and are subject to offset under the Treasury Offset Program 21 (31 U.S.C. § 3716(c)(3)(B) (2006)). Any EAJA fees should therefore be awarded to 22 Plaintiff and not to Plaintiff’ s attorney. If, after receiving the Court’ s EAJA fee order, 23 the Commissioner (1) determines that Plaintiff has assigned his right to EAJA fees to 24 1 his attorney, which he has done in this case; (2) determines that Plaintiff does not owe 2 a debt that is subject to offset under the Treasury Offset Program, and (3) agrees to 3 waive the requirements of the Anti-Assignment Act, then the EAJA fees will be made 4 payable to Plaintiff’ s attorney. However, if there is a debt owed under the Treasury 5 Offset Program, the Commissioner cannot agree to waive the requirements of the Anti- 6 Assignment Act, and the remaining EAJA fees after offset will be paid by a check made 7 out to Plaintiff but delivered to Plaintiff’ s attorney. 8 DATED this 21st day of March 2022. 9 __A________________ 10 THERESA L. FRICKE 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24