(SS) Isiah v. Commissioner of Social Security

District Court, E.D. California·Decided March 20, 2020·No. 1:18-cv-01726·Unknown

Opinion

McGREGOR W. SCOTT United States Attorney DEBORAH LEE STACHEL, CSBN 230138 Regional Chief Counsel, Region IX Social Security Administration Asim Modi Special Assistant United States Attorney Assistant Regional Counsel Social Security Administration, Region IX 160 Spear Street, Suite 800 San Francisco, California 94105 Tel: (415) 977-8952 E-mail: asim.modi@ssa.gov Attorneys for Defendant Jonathan O. Peña, Esq. CA Bar ID No.: 278044 Peña & Bromberg, PLC 2440 Tulare St., Ste. 320 Fresno, CA 93721 Telephone: 559-439-9700 Facsimile: 559-439-9700 info@jonathanpena.com Attorney for Plaintiff, Joanna Isiah FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA Joanna Isiah, Case No. 1:18-cv-01726 Plaintiff, STIPULATION AND ORDER FOR THE AWARD OF ATTORNEY FEES UNDER v. THE EQUAL ACCESS TO JUSTICE ACT (EAJA) Andrew Saul, Commissioner of 28 U.S.C. § 2412(d) Social Security, (Doc. 23) Defendant. TO THE HONORABLE SHEILA K. OBERTO, MAGISTRATE JUDGE OF THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT: The Parties through their undersigned counsel, subject to the Court’s approval, stipulate that Plaintiff be awarded attorney fees in the amount of FIVE THOUSAND EIGHT HUNDRED DOLLARS AND 00/100 $5,800.00, 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. § 2412(d). After the Court issues an order for EAJA fees to Plaintiff, the government will consider the matter of Plaintiff’s assignment of EAJA fees to counsel. Pursuant to Astrue v. Ratliff, 560 U.S. 586, 598, 130 S.Ct. 2521, 177 L.Ed.2d 91 (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 Plaintiff, but if the Department of the Treasury determines that Plaintiff does not owe a federal debt, then the government shall cause the payment of fees, expenses and costs to be made directly to counsel, pursuant to the assignment executed by Plaintiff. Any payments made shall be delivered to Plaintiff’s counsel, Jonathan O. Peña. This stipulation constitutes a compromise settlement of Plaintiff’s request for EAJA fees, and does not constitute an admission of liability on the part of Defendant under the EAJA. Payment of FIVE THOUSAND EIGHT HUNDRED DOLLARS AND 00/100 $5,800.00, in EAJA attorney fees shall constitute a complete release from, and bar to, any and all claims that Plaintiff and Plaintiff’s attorney, Jonathan O. Peña, may have relating to EAJA attorney fees in connection with this action. This award is without prejudice to the rights of Plaintiff’s attorney 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: March 20, 2020 /s/ Jonathan O. Peña J ONATHAN O. PEÑA Attorney for Plaintiff

Dated: March 20, 2020 McGREGOR W. SCOTT United States Attorney DEBORAH LEE STACHEL Regional Chief Counsel, Region IX Social Security Administration

By: _*_Asim Modi Asim Modi Special Assistant U.S. Attorney Attorneys for Defendant (*Permission to use electronic signature obtained via email on March 20, 2020).

Based upon the parties’ above “Amended Stipulation for the Award and Payment of Attorney Fees Under the Equal Access to Justice Act (EAJA), 28 U.S.C. §2412(d)” (the “Stipulation”) (Doc. 23), IT IS ORDERED that attorney’s fees in the amount of FIVE THOUSAND EIGHT HUNDRED DOLLARS AND 00/100 ($5,800.00) as authorized under the Equal Access to Justice Act (EAJA), 28 U.S.C. § 2412(d), be awarded subject to the terms of the Stipulation.

IT IS SO ORDERED. Sheila K. Oberto Dated: March 20, 2020 /s/ . UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE

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

(SS) Isiah v. Commissioner of Social Security, (E.D. Cal. 2020).

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