(SS) Santos v. Commissioner of Social Security

District Court, E.D. California·Decided June 5, 2023·No. 1:22-cv-00361·Unknown

Opinion

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA FRESNO DIVISION Case No. 1:22-cv-00361-EPG

Plaintiff, STIPULATION FOR THE AWARD AND PAYMENT OF ATTORNEY FEES AND v. EXPENSES PURSUANT TO THE EQUAL ACCESS TO JUSTICE ACT, 28 U.S.C. § 2412(d), KILOLO KIJAKAZI, A ND COSTS PURSUANT TO 28 U.S.C. § 1920 Acting Commissioner of Social Security, (ECF No. 29) 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 $7,130.81 (SEVEN THOUSAND ONE HUNDRED dollars EIGHT-ONE cents) under the Equal Access to Justice Act (EAJA), 28 U.S.C. § 2412(d), and zero 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, if any. Pursuant to Astrue v. Ratliff, 560 U.S. 586, 598, 130 S.Ct. 2521, 177 L.Ed.2d 91 (2010), the ability to honor any 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 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 counsel and/or counsel’s firm to seek Social Security Act attorney fees under 42 U.S.C. § 406(b), subject to the savings clause provisions of the DATE: June 2, 2023 /s/ Jared Thomas Walker JARED THOMAS WALKER Law Office of Jared T. Walker, PC Attorney for Plaintiff *Authorized via e-mail on June 1, 2023

United States Attorney Associate General Counsel Office of Program Litigation, Office 7 Social Security Administration

By /s/ Elizabeth Landgraf Special Assistant United States Attorney

Attorneys for Defendant

Based upon the parties’ Stipulation for the Award and Payment of Equal Access to Justice Act Fees, Costs, and Expenses (ECF No. 29), IT IS ORDERED that fees in the amount of $7,130.81 as authorized by 28 U.S.C. § 2412, and zero costs under 28 U.S.C. § 1920, be awarded subject to the terms of the Stipulation. Further, in light of the Stipulation, the Clerk of Court is directed to terminate Plaintiff's motion for attorney fees (ECF No. 25) as moot.

IT IS SO ORDERED. g | Dated: _ June 5, 2023 [spe ey □□ UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE

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

(SS) Santos v. Commissioner of Social Security, (E.D. Cal. 2023).

(SS) Santos v. Commissioner of Social Security ((SS) Santos v. Commissioner of Social Security) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.

Related

Buckner v. Finley & Van Lear
27 U.S. 586 (Supreme Court, 1829)
Astrue v. Ratliff
560 U.S. 586 (Supreme Court, 2010)