(SS) Caren v. Commissioner of Social Security

District Court, E.D. California·Decided April 11, 2022·No. 2:21-cv-00442·Unknown

Opinion

PETER E. BRIXIE, Bar #124186 Attorney at Law 410 Twelfth Street, Suite One Sacramento, CA 95814 Telephone: (916) 658-1880 Fax: (916) 658-1884 E-mail: peterbrixie@gmail.com Attorney for JOHN CAREN UNITED STATE DISTRICT COURT JOHN CAREN, No. 2:21-cv-0442 DB Plaintiff, STIPULATION AND ORDER FOR vs. PAYMENT OF PLAINTIFF’S ATTORNEY FEES Defendant

To the honorable DEBORAH BARNES, it is hereby stipulated by and between the parties through their undersigned counsel, subject to the approval of the Court, that JOHN CAREN be awarded attorney fees and expenses in the amount of $10,650.00 under the Equal Access to Justice Act (EAJA), 28 U.S.C. § 2412(d). This amount represents compensation for all legal services rendered on behalf of Plaintiff by counsel in connection with this civil action, in accordance with 28 U.S.C. §§ 1920; 2412(d). After the Court issues an order for EAJA fees to JOHN CAREN, the government will consider the matter of assignment of EAJA fees to PETER BRIXIE. The retainer agreement containing the assignment is attached as exhibit 1. Pursuant to Astrue v. Ratliff, 130 S.Ct. 2521, 2529 (2010), the ability to honor the assignment will depend on whether the fees are subject to any offset allowed under the United States Department of the Treasury's Offset Program. After the order for EAJA fees is entered, the government will determine whether they are subject to any offset. Fees shall be made payable to JOHN CAREN, but if the Department of the Treasury determines that JOHN CAREN does not owe a federal debt, then the government shall cause the payment of fees, expenses and costs to be made directly to PETER BRIXIE pursuant to the assignment executed by JOHN CAREN Any payments made shall be delivered to PETER BRIXIE This stipulation constitutes a compromise settlement of JOHN CAREN’s request for EAJA attorney fees in the JOHN CAREN vs. COMMISSIONER OF SOCIAL SECURITY case but does not constitute an admission of liability on the part of Defendant under the EAJA or otherwise. Payment of the agreed amount shall constitute a complete release from, and bar to, any and all claims that JOHN CAREN and/or PETER BRIXIE, as his counsel including counsel’s firm may have relating to EAJA attorney fees in connection with this action. This award is without prejudice to the rights of PETER BRIXIE and/or counsel’s firm to seek Social Security Act attorney fees under 42 U.S.C. § 406(b), subject to the savings clause provisions of the EAJA. Respectfully submitted, Dated: April 5, 2022 By: /s/ Peter Brixie Attorney at Law Attorney for Plaintiff

Dated: April 5, 2022 /s/Linda Green Special Assistant United States Attorney Attorneys for Defendant

ORDER Pursuant to the parties’ stipulation, IT IS SO ORDERED. DATED: April 8, 2022 /s/ DEBORAH BARNES UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE

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

(SS) Caren v. Commissioner of Social Security, (E.D. Cal. 2022).

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

Related

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