(SS) Landis v. Commissioner of Social Security

District Court, E.D. California·Decided June 7, 2024·No. 1:23-cv-00881·Unknown

Opinion

1 Jonathan O. Peña, Esq. CA Bar ID No.: 278044 2 Peña & Bromberg, PLC 2440 Tulare St., Ste. 320 3 Fresno, CA 93721 4 Telephone: 559-439-9700 Facsimile: 559-439-9723 5 Email: info@jonathanpena.com 6 Attorney for Plaintiff, Lisa Ann Landis

8 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 9 FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA 10 FRESNO DIVISION

11 Lisa Ann Landis, Case No. 1:23-cv-00881-SKO 12 Plaintiff, STIPULATION AND UNOPPOSED 13 MOTION FOR THE AWARD AND 14 v. PAYMENT OF ATTORNEY FEES AND EXPENSES PURSUANT TO THE 15 Martin O’Malley1, Commissioner of EQUAL ACCESS TO JUSTICE ACT; 16 Social Security, ORDER

17 Defendant. (Doc. 24) 18

19 IT IS HEREBY STIPULATED by and between the parties through their 20 undersigned counsel, subject to the approval of the Court, that Plaintiff be awarded 21 attorney fees and expenses in the amount of NINE THOUSAND TWO HUNDRED 22 DOLLARS AND 00/100 ($9,200.00) under the Equal Access to Justice Act (EAJA), 28 23 U.S.C. § 2412(d), and costs in the amount of ZERO dollars ($0.00) under 28 U.S.C. 24 25 1 Martin O’Malley became the Commissioner of Social Security on December 26 20, 2023. Pursuant to Rule 25(d) of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure, Martin O’Malley should be substituted for Kilolo Kijakazi as the defendant in this suit. No 27 further action need be taken to continue this suit by reason of the last sentence of section 205(g) of the Social Security Act, 42 U.S.C. § 405(g). 1 §1920. This amount represents compensation for all legal services rendered on behalf of 2 Plaintiff by counsel in connection with this civil action, in accordance with 28 U.S.C. 3 §§ 1920, 2412(d). 4 After the Court issues an order for EAJA fees to Plaintiff, the government will 5 consider the matter of Plaintiff’s assignment of EAJA fees to counsel. Pursuant to 6 Astrue v. Ratliff, 560 U.S. 586, 598, 130 S.Ct. 2521, 177 L.Ed.2d 91 (2010), the ability 7 to honor the assignment will depend on whether the fees are subject to any offset 8 allowed under the United States Department of the Treasury’s Offset Program. After 9 the order for EAJA fees is entered, the government will determine whether they are 10 subject to any offset. 11 Fees shall be made payable to Plaintiff, but if the Department of the Treasury 12 determines that Plaintiff does not owe a federal debt, then the government shall cause 13 the payment of fees, expenses and costs to be made directly to Counsel, pursuant to 14 the assignment executed by Plaintiff. Any payments made shall be delivered and 15 made payable to Plaintiff’s counsel, Jonathan O. Peña. Additionally, any payment of 16 costs under 28 U.S.C. §1920 may be made either by electronic fund transfer (ETF) or 17 by check. 18 This stipulation constitutes a compromise settlement of Plaintiff’s request for 19 EAJA attorney fees, and does not constitute an admission of liability on the part of 20 Defendant under the EAJA or otherwise. Payment of the agreed amount shall 21 constitute a complete release from, and bar to, any and all claims that Plaintiff and/or 22 Counsel including Counsel’s firm may have relating to EAJA attorney fees in 23 connection with this action. 24 This award is without prejudice to the rights of Counsel and/or Counsel’s firm 25 to seek Social Security Act attorney fees under 42 U.S.C. § 406(b), subject to the 26 savings clause provisions of the EAJA. 27 Respectfully submitted, 1 Dated: June 5, 2024 /s/ Jonathan O. Peña 2 J ONATHAN O. PEÑA Attorney for Plaintiff 3

4 Dated: June 6, 2024 PHILLIP A. TALBERT 5 United States Attorney MATHEW W. PILE 6 Associate General Counsel 7 Office of Program Litigation 8 Social Security Administration

9 By: _*_Caspar I. Chan 10 Caspar I. Chan Special Assistant U.S. Attorney 11 Attorneys for Defendant 12 (*Permission to use electronic signature obtained via email on June 6, 2024). 13 14 ORDER Based upon the parties’ foregoing Stipulation and Unopposed Motion for the 15 16 Award and Payment of Equal Access to Justice Act Fees and Expenses (the “Stipulation”) 17 (Doc. 24), 18 IT IS ORDERED that fees and expenses in the amount of NINE THOUSAND 19 20 TWO HUNDRED DOLLARS AND 00/100 ($9,200.00) as authorized by the Equal 21 Access to Justice Act (EAJA), 28 U.S.C. § 2412(d) and costs in the amount of ZERO 22 23 dollars ($0.00) under 28 U.S.C. §1920 be awarded subject to the terms of the Stipulation. 24 25 IT IS SO ORDERED.

26 Dated: June 7, 2024 /s/ Sheila K. Oberto . 27 UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE

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

(SS) Landis v. Commissioner of Social Security, (E.D. Cal. 2024).

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