(SS) John v. Commisioner of Social Security

District Court, E.D. California·Decided June 4, 2021·No. 2:19-cv-02008·Unknown

Opinion

PHILLIP A. TALBERT Acting United States Attorney Regional Chief Counsel, Region IX Social Security Administration CASPAR CHAN, CSBN 294804 Special Assistant United States Attorney 160 Spear Street, Suite 800 San Francisco, CA 94105 Telephone: 510-970-4810 Facsimile: 415-744-0134 Email: Caspar.Chan@ssa.gov Attorneys for Defendant ) Case No.: 2:19-CV-2008-CKD ) Plaintiff, ) STIPULATION AND ORDER THE ) AWARD AND PAYMENT OF vs. ) ATTORNEY FEES AND EXPENSES ) PURSUANT TO THE EQUAL ACCESS ) TO JUSTICE ACT, 28 U.S.C. § 2412(d), ANDREW SAUL, ) AND COSTS PURSUANT TO 28 U.S.C. § Commissioner of Social Security, ) 1920 ) ) Defendant. IT IS HEREBY STIPULATED by and between the parties through their undersigned counsel, subject to the approval of the Court, that Plaintiff be awarded attorney fees and expenses in the amount of SEVEN THOUSAND EIGHT HUNDRED dollars and NO cents ($7,800.00) under the Equal Access to Justice Act (EAJA), 28 U.S.C. § 2412(d) AND no costs under 28 U.S.C. § 1920. 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 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 Plaintiff’s counsel, pursuant to the assignment executed by Plaintiff. Any payments made shall be delivered to Plaintiff’s counsel. This stipulation constitutes a compromise settlement of Plaintiff’s request for EAJA attorney fees, and 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 Plaintiff and/or 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 Plaintiff’s counsel to seek Social Security Act attorney fees under 42 U.S.C. § 406(b), subject to the savings clause provisions of the EAJA. ////

////

////

////

////

//// Date: June 4, 2021 LEGAL SERVICES OF NORTHERN CALIFORNIA By: /s/ Caspar Chan for Antonio Serrano Valdez, Jr* ANTONIO SERRANO VALDEZ, JR. *Authorized by email on June 4, 2021 Attorneys for Plaintiff Date: June 4, 2021 PHILLIP A. TALBERT Acting United States Attorney DEBORAH LEE STACHEL Regional Chief Counsel, Region IX By: /s/ Caspar Chan Special Assistant United States Attorney Attorneys for Defendant APPROVED AND SO ORDERED. '5 Dated: June 4, 2021 A Ph CAND fr {A _t ME f eo, CAROLYN K. DELANEY UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE

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

(SS) John v. Commisioner of Social Security, (E.D. Cal. 2021).

(SS) John v. Commisioner of Social Security ((SS) John v. Commisioner 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)