(SS) Sanders v. Commissioner of Social Security

Opinion

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 9 FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA 10 11 VERNON GRANT SANDERS, No. 1:21-cv-00204-DAD-BAM 12 Plaintiff, 13 v. ORDER ADOPTING THE PARTIES’ STIPULATION FOR THE AWARD OF 14 COMMISSIONER OF SOCIAL ATTORNEY’S FEES UNDER THE EQUAL SECURITY, ACCESS TO JUSICE ACT 15 Defendant. (Doc. No. 28, 30) 16 17 On February 18, 2021, plaintiff Vernon Grant Sanders filed this action seeking review of a 18 final decision of defendant Commissioner of Social Security. (Doc. No. 1.) On April 16, 2024, 19 the matter was remanded to the Commissioner of Social Security for further proceedings pursuant 20 to 42 U.S.C. § 405(g). (Doc. No. 26.) 21 On July 12, 2024, plaintiff filed a motion for attorney’s fees under the Equal Access to 22 Justice Act (“EAJA”), 28 U.S.C. § 2412(d). (Doc. No. 28.) Shortly thereafter, the assigned 23 magistrate judge issued an order setting a briefing schedule on the pending motion, though the 24 magistrate judge also strongly encouraged counsel to meet and confer on the issue of attorneys’ 25 fees and attempt to “resolve this motion without further court involvement.” (Doc. No. 29.) 26 Consequently, on August 1, 2024, the parties filed a joint stipulation with the court in 27 which the parties agree that plaintiff shall be awarded attorney’s fees in the amount of $5,725.00 28 and expenses in the amount of $17.58 under the EAJA, as well as $402.00 in costs under 28 1 U.S.C. § 1920. (Doc. No. 30.) The parties agree that this total amount represents “compensation 2 for all legal services rendered on behalf of plaintiff by counsel in connection with this civil 3 action.” (Id. at 1.) 4 Good cause appearing, and pursuant to the parties’ August 1, 2024 stipulation (Doc. 5 No. 30), the court orders as follows: 6 1. Pursuant to the EAJA, 28 U.S.C. § 2412(d), plaintiff is awarded attorney’s fees in 7 the amount of $5,725.00 and expenses in the amount of $17.58; 8 2. Pursuant to 28 U.S.C § 1920, plaintiff is awarded court costs in the amount of 9 $402.00; 10 3. After the issuance of this order, the government shall consider the assignment of 11 the EAJA attorney’s fees to plaintiff’s counsel; 12 a. Pursuant to the decision in Astrue v. Ratliff, 560 U.S. 586 (2010), any such 13 assignment will depend on whether the attorney’s fees are subject to any 14 offset allowed under the United States Department of Treasury’s (“the 15 DOT”) Offset Program; and 16 b. Fees shall be made payable to plaintiff, but if the DOT determines that 17 plaintiff does not owe a federal debt, then the government shall cause the 18 payment of attorney’s fees to be made directly to plaintiff’s counsel, Stuart 19 Barasch; 20 4. Whether the payment of attorney’s fees is made payable to plaintiff or to his 21 counsel, the check will be mailed to plaintiff’s counsel’s mailing address at:

22 Stuart Barasch Law Offices of Stuart Barasch 23 P.O. Box 961719 El Paso, TX 79996 24 25 ///// 26 ///// 27 ///// 28 ///// 1 5. The pending motion for attorneys’ fees (Doc. No. 28) is denied as having been 2 rendered moot by this order. 3 IT IS SO ORDERED. * | Dated: _ August 12,2024 Dal A. 2, sxe 5 DALE A. DROZD ‘ UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28