(SS) Hill v. Commissioner of Social Security

District Court, E.D. California·Decided January 3, 2025·No. 2:24-cv-02266·Unknown

Opinion

1 Francesco Benavides, CSBN 258924 Law Offices of Francesco Benavides 2 1990 N. California Blvd. 8th Floor Walnut Creek, CA 94596 3 Tel: (925) 222-7071 Email: francesco@benavidesdisabilitylaw.com 4 Attorney for Plaintiff 5 MATTHEW HILL 6 7 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA 8 SACRAMENTO DIVISION 9

10 MATTHEW HILL, Case No. 2:24-cv-02266-SCR

11 Plaintiff, STIPULATION FOR THE AWARD AND PAYMENT OF ATTORNEY FEES AND 12 v. EXPENSES PURSUANT TO THE EQUAL 13 ACCESS TO JUSTICE ACT; [PROPOSED] CAROLYN COLVIN, Acting ORDER 14 Commissioner of Social Security,

15 Defendant. 16 IT IS HEREBY STIPULATED by and between the parties through their undersigned counsel, 17 subject to the approval of the Court, that Plaintiff be awarded attorney fees and expenses in the amount 18 of $6,600.00, under the Equal Access to Justice Act (EAJA), 28 U.S.C. § 2412(d), and no costs under 19 28 U.S.C. § 1920. This amount represents compensation for all legal services rendered on behalf of 20 Plaintiff by counsel in connection with this civil action, in accordance with 28 U.S.C. §§ 2412(d), 21 1920. 22 After the Court issues an order for EAJA fees to Plaintiff, the government will consider the 23 matter of Plaintiff’s assignment of EAJA fees to counsel. Pursuant to Astrue v. Ratliff, 560 U.S. 586, 24 598, 130 S.Ct. 2521, 177 L.Ed.2d 91 (2010), the ability to honor the assignment will depend on 25 whether the fees are subject to any offset allowed under the United States Department of the 26 Treasury’s Offset Program. After the order for EAJA fees is entered, the government will determine 27 whether they are subject to any offset. 1 Fees shall be made payable to Plaintiff, but if the Department of the Treasury determines that 2 Plaintiff does not owe a federal debt, then the government shall cause the payment of fees, expenses 3 and costs to be made directly to Plaintiff’s counsel, Francesco Benavides, pursuant to the assignment 4 executed by Plaintiff. 5 Payments may be made by electronic fund transfer (EFT) or by check. 6 This stipulation constitutes a compromise settlement of Plaintiff’s request for EAJA attorney 7 fees and does not constitute an admission of liability on the part of Defendant under the EAJA or 8 otherwise. Payment of the agreed amount shall constitute a complete release from, and bar to, any 9 and all claims that Plaintiff and/or Francesco Benavides, including the Law Offices of Francesco 10 Benavides, may have relating to EAJA attorney fees in connection with this action. 11 This award is without prejudice to the rights of Francesco Benavides to seek Social Security 12 Act attorney fees under 42 U.S.C. § 406(b), subject to the savings clause provisions of the EAJA. 13 14 Respectfully submitted,

16 Dated: December 18, 2024 Law Offices of Francesco Benavides

17 By: /s/ Francesco Benavides FRANCESCO P. BENAVIDES 18 Attorney for Plaintiff 19

20 Dated: December 18, 2024 PHILLIP A. TALBERT United States Attorney 21 MATHEW W. PILE Associate General Counsel 22 Social Security Administration 23 By: Mary Tsai* 24 MARY TSAI Special Assistant U.S. Attorney 25 Attorneys for Defendant (*Permission to use electronic signature 26 obtained via email on December 18, 2024). 27 1 [PROPOSED] ORDER 2 Based upon the parties’ Stipulation for the Award and Payment of Equal Access to Justice Act 3 || Fees and Expenses, IT IS ORDERED that fees and expenses in the amount of $6,600.00 as 4 || authorized by 28 U.S.C. § 2412, and no costs under 28 U.S.C. § 1920, be awarded subject to the terms 5 of the Stipulation. 6 fonrfobe 8 || DATE: January 2, 2025 9 HON. SEAN C. RIORDAN UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 -3-

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

(SS) Hill v. Commissioner of Social Security, (E.D. Cal. 2025).

(SS) Hill v. Commissioner of Social Security ((SS) Hill 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)