(SS) King v. Commissioner Social Security

District Court, E.D. California·Decided November 4, 2022·No. 2:20-cv-02178·Unknown

Opinion

BARBARA MARIE RIZZO (CSBN 172999) Attorney at Law P. O. Box 383103 Waikoloa, HI 96738 Telephone: 808-785-6088 Fax: 808-440-0699 E-Mail: mail@fedlaborlaw.com Attorney for Plaintiff Denise Lea King

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA ____________________________________ ) DENISE LEA KING, ) No. 2:20-cv-2178 DB ) Plaintiff, ) ) STIPULATION AND ORDER APPROVING v. ) SETTLEMENT OF ATTORNEY FEES AND ) EXPENSES PURSUANT TO THE EQUAL KILOLO KIJAKAZI, Acting ) ACCESS TO JUSTICE ACT, Commissioner of Social Security, ) 28 U.S.C. §2412(d); AND COSTS ) PURSUANT TO 28 U.S.C. §1920 Defendant. ) ____________________________________) IT IS HEREBY STIPULATED by and between the parties, through their undersigned counsel, subject to the Court's approval, that Plaintiff be awarded SEVENTEEN THOUSAND FIVE HUNDRED AND NINETY DOLLARS AND EIGHTY CENTS ($17,590.80) in attorney fees and expenses under the Equal Access to Justice Act ("EAJA"). These amounts represent compensation for 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 awarding EAJA fees and expenses to Plaintiff, the Government will consider the matter of Plaintiff's assignment of EAJA fees and expenses to Plaintiff's attorney. Pursuant to Astrue v. Ratliff, 130 S.Ct. 2521 (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 awarding EAJA fees and expenses is entered, the Government will determine whether the fees are subject to any offset. If the Department of the Treasury determines that Plaintiff does not owe a federal debt, the Government shall cause the payment of fees and expenses to be made directly to Barbara Marie Rizzo, 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 expenses and does not constitute an admission of liability on the part of Defendant under the EAJA. Payment of the agreed amount shall constitute a complete release from, and bar to, any and all claims that Plaintiff and/or Plaintiff's counsel may have relating to EAJA attorney fees and expenses in connection with this action. This award is without prejudice to the rights of Plaintiff's counsel to seek attorney fees pursuant to the Social Security Act, 42 U.S.C. §406(b), subject to the offset provisions of the EAJA. Respectfully submitted,

Dated: October 26, 2022 “/s/Barbara Marie Rizzo” BARBARA MARIE RIZZO Attorney for Plaintiff

Dated: October 26, 2022 "/s/Caspar Chan" (As authorized via e-mail) Special Assistant United States Attorney Attorney for Defendant Kilolo Kijakazi, Acting Commissioner of Social Security

Pursuant to the parties’ stipulation, IT IS SO ORDERED. DATE: November 3, 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) King v. Commissioner Social Security, (E.D. Cal. 2022).

(SS) King v. Commissioner Social Security ((SS) King v. Commissioner 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)