Rangel v. Commissioner of Social Security Administration

Opinion

1 WO 2 3 4 5 6 IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 7 FOR THE DISTRICT OF ARIZONA

9 Yolanda Rangel, No. CV-19-00875-PHX-DWL

10 Plaintiff, ORDER

11 v.

12 Commissioner of Social Security Administration, 13 Defendant. 14 15 Pending before the Court are (1) Plaintiff’s motion for an award of attorneys’ fees 16 under the Equal Access to Justice Act (“EAJA”) seeking $8,014.23 (Doc. 25) and (2) a 17 stipulation1 by the parties that Plaintiff be awarded $7,214.23 in EAJA fees and expenses 18 (Doc. 26). 19 IT IS ORDERED that the parties’ Stipulation for Award of Attorney Fees under 20 the Equal Access to Justice Act (Doc. 26) is granted and Plaintiff is awarded $7,214.23 in 21 EAJA fees and expenses. The motion (Doc. 25) is denied as moot. 22 IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that, pursuant to the parties’ stipulation, if the 23 government determines that Plaintiff does not owe a debt subject to offset under the 24 Treasury Offset Program, 31 U.SC. § 3716(c), and the government agrees 25 to waive the requirements of the Anti-Assignment Act, 31 U.S.C. § 3727, the government 26 shall pay the EAJA award to Plaintiff’s counsel. If there is a debt owed under the

27 1 “Ideally, of course, litigants will settle the amount of a fee. Where settlement is not possible, the fee applicant bears the burden of establishing entitlement to an award 28 and documenting the appropriate hours expended and hourly rates.” Hensley v. Eckerhart, 461 U.S. 424, 437 (1983). Treasury Offset Program, the remaining EAJA award after offset will be paid by a check 2 || made out to Plaintiff but delivered to Plaintiffs counsel. 3 Dated this 27th day of August, 2020. 4 5 im =? 6 f t _ Dominic W. Lanza 7 United States District Judge 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28

_2-