Rogers v. Commissioner of Social Security Administration

D. Arizona

Rogers v. Commissioner of Social Security Administration

DecidedFebruary 4, 2020

Docket4:18-cv-00260

StatusUnknown

This text of Rogers v. Commissioner of Social Security Administration (Rogers v. Commissioner of Social Security Administration) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering District Court, D. Arizona primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook

Rogers v. Commissioner of Social Security Administration, (D. Ariz. 2020).

Pincite

Opinion

1 WO 2 3 4 5 6 IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 7 FOR THE DISTRICT OF ARIZONA 8 9 Jonathan Rogers, No. CV-18-0260-TUC-BGM

10 Plaintiff,

11 v. ORDER

12 Andrew Saul,1 Commissioner of Social Security, 13 Defendant. 14 15 Currently pending before the Court is the Plaintiff’s Application for Award of 16 Attorneys’ Fees and Costs Under the Equal Access to Justice Act and Memorandum of 17 Points and Authorities (Doc. 25). Defendant does not object to the fees requested. See 18 id. Having reviewed the same, and good cause appearing, IT IS HEREBY ORDERED 19 that Plaintiff’s motion (Doc. 25) is GRANTED. 20 IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that Plaintiff be awarded attorney’s fees of 21 $4,842.06 pursuant to the Equal Access to Justice Act (“EAJA”), 28 U.S.C. § 2412(d). 22 EAJA fees awarded by this Court belong to the Plaintiff and are subject to offset 23 under the Treasury Offset Program (31 U.S.C. § 3716(c)(3)(B) (2006)). See Astrue v. 24 Ratliff, 560 U.S. 586, 595–98, 130 S.Ct. 2521, 2528–29, 177 L.Ed.2d 91 (2010). As 25 such, IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that if, after receiving this Order, the Commissioner 26 27 1 The Court takes judicial notice that Nancy A. Berryhill is no longer Acting Commissioner of the Social Security Administration (“SSA”). The Court will substitute the new 28 Commissioner of the SSA, Thomas M. Saul, as Respondent pursuant to Rule 25(d) of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure. See also Fed. R. App. P. 43(c)(2). 1 || determines upon its effectuation that Plaintiff does not owe a debt that is subject to offset 2|| under the Treasury Offset Program, fees will be made payable to Plaintiff's attorney, Kathryn Dicus. If, however, there is a debt owed that is subject to offset under the Treasury Offset Program, the remaining EAJA fees after offset will be paid by a check || made out to Plaintiff but delivered to Plaintiffs attorney. Any check for EAJA fees shall 6|| be mailed to Plaintiffs counsel at the following address: Dicus Disability, LLC, 10645 North Tatum Boulevard, No. 329, Phoenix, Arizona 85028. 8 Dated this 31st day of January, 2020.

10 Honorable Bruce G. Macdonald United States Magistrate Judge 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28

_2-

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

1 WO 2 3 4 5 6 IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 7 FOR THE DISTRICT OF ARIZONA 8 9 Jonathan Rogers, No. CV-18-0260-TUC-BGM

10 Plaintiff,

11 v. ORDER

12 Andrew Saul,1 Commissioner of Social Security, 13 Defendant. 14 15 Currently pending before the Court is the Plaintiff’s Application for Award of 16 Attorneys’ Fees and Costs Under the Equal Access to Justice Act and Memorandum of 17 Points and Authorities (Doc. 25). Defendant does not object to the fees requested. See 18 id. Having reviewed the same, and good cause appearing, IT IS HEREBY ORDERED 19 that Plaintiff’s motion (Doc. 25) is GRANTED. 20 IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that Plaintiff be awarded attorney’s fees of 21 $4,842.06 pursuant to the Equal Access to Justice Act (“EAJA”), 28 U.S.C. § 2412(d). 22 EAJA fees awarded by this Court belong to the Plaintiff and are subject to offset 23 under the Treasury Offset Program (31 U.S.C. § 3716(c)(3)(B) (2006)). See Astrue v. 24 Ratliff, 560 U.S. 586, 595–98, 130 S.Ct. 2521, 2528–29, 177 L.Ed.2d 91 (2010). As 25 such, IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that if, after receiving this Order, the Commissioner 26 27 1 The Court takes judicial notice that Nancy A. Berryhill is no longer Acting Commissioner of the Social Security Administration (“SSA”). The Court will substitute the new 28 Commissioner of the SSA, Thomas M. Saul, as Respondent pursuant to Rule 25(d) of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure. See also Fed. R. App. P. 43(c)(2). 1 || determines upon its effectuation that Plaintiff does not owe a debt that is subject to offset 2|| under the Treasury Offset Program, fees will be made payable to Plaintiff's attorney, Kathryn Dicus. If, however, there is a debt owed that is subject to offset under the Treasury Offset Program, the remaining EAJA fees after offset will be paid by a check || made out to Plaintiff but delivered to Plaintiffs attorney. Any check for EAJA fees shall 6|| be mailed to Plaintiffs counsel at the following address: Dicus Disability, LLC, 10645 North Tatum Boulevard, No. 329, Phoenix, Arizona 85028. 8 Dated this 31st day of January, 2020.

10 Honorable Bruce G. Macdonald United States Magistrate Judge 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28

_2-

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

Rogers v. Commissioner of Social Security Administration, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/rogers-v-commissioner-of-social-security-administration-azd-2020.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack