(SS) Walker v. Commissioner of Social Security

E.D. California

(SS) Walker v. Commissioner of Social Security

DecidedJanuary 22, 2025

Docket2:24-cv-01956

StatusUnknown

This text of (SS) Walker v. Commissioner of Social Security ((SS) Walker v. Commissioner of Social Security) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering District Court, E.D. California primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook

(SS) Walker v. Commissioner of Social Security, (E.D. Cal. 2025).

Pincite

Opinion

1 MARGARET LEHRKIND SBCA # 314717 2 Lehrkind Law Office, P.C. 3 2625 Alcatraz Ave, # 208 Berkeley, CA 94705 4 Tel: 510-590-1907 Margaret@LehrkindLawOffice.com 5

6 7 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 8 EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA 9 SHERMAN WALKER, CASE NO.: 2:24-cv-01956-DMC 10 Plaintiff, STIPULATION FOR THE AWARD AND 11 PAYMENT OF ATTORNEY FEES AND vs. EXPENSES PURUSANT TO THE EQUAL 12 ACCESS TO JUSTICE ACT; [PROPOSED] 13 ACTING COMMISSIONER OF SOCIAL ORDER SECURITY, 14 Defendant 15 16 The parties, through their respective counsel, hereby agree that attorney fees in the 17 18 amount of $6,300 shall be awarded to Plaintiff pursuant to the Equal Access to Justice Act, 28 19 U.S.C. § 2412 and costs of $0, pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1920. This amount represents 20 compensation for all legal services rendered on behalf of Plaintiff by counsel in connection with 21 this civil action, in accordance with 28 U.S.C. §§ 1920; 2412(d). Such attorney fees shall be 22 subject to verification that Plaintiff has no debt which qualifies for offset, pursuant to the 23 Treasury Offset Program as discussed in Astrue v. Ratliff, 130 S. Ct. 2521 (2010). 24 25 If the U.S. Department of the Treasury determines that Plaintiff’s EAJA fees are not 26 subject to any offset allowed under the Department of the Treasury’s Offset Program, then the 27 STIPULATION FOR THE AWARD AND PAYMENT OF ATTORNEY FEES AND 28 EXPENSES PURUSANT TO THE EQUAL ACCESS TO JUSTICE ACT; [PROPOSED] ORDER - 1 1 check or electronic funds transfer for EAJA fees shall be made payable to Plaintiff’s attorney, 2 Margaret Lehrkind, based upon Plaintiff’s assignment of these amounts to her. See Exhibit – 3 Retainer Agreement. If Plaintiff has a debt, then any remaining funds after offset shall be made 4 5 payable to Plaintiff and mailed to counsel’s address. 6 This stipulation constitutes a compromise settlement of Plaintiff’s request for EAJA 7 attorney fees and expenses and does not constitute an admission of liability on the part of 8 Defendant under the EAJA or otherwise. Payment of the agreed amount shall constitute a 9 complete release from, and bar to, any and all claims that Plaintiff and/or Plaintiff’s counsel, 10 including Lehrkind Law Office, P.C., may have relating to EAJA attorney fees and expenses in 11 12 connection with this action. 13 This award is without prejudice to the rights of Plaintiff’s counsel to seek Social Security 14 Act attorney fees under 42 U.S.C. § 406, subject to the offset provisions of the EAJA. 15 16 DATE: January 22, 2025 Respectfully submitted, 17 18 Lehrkind Law Office, P.C.

19 By: /s/ Margaret Lehrkind 20 Margaret Lehrkind Attorney for Plaintiff 21 DATE: January 22, 2025 By: /s/ Margaret Branick-Abilla * 22 Margaret Branick-Abilla 23 *As authorized via email on 1/22/25 Special Assistant United States Attorney 24 Attorney for Defendant

26 27 STIPULATION FOR THE AWARD AND PAYMENT OF ATTORNEY FEES AND 28 EXPENSES PURUSANT TO THE EQUAL ACCESS TO JUSTICE ACT; [PROPOSED] ORDER - 2 1 ORDER 3 || Based upon the parties’ Stipulation for the Award and Payment of Equal Access to Justice Act 4 and Expenses (the “Stipulation”), > IT IS ORDERED that fees and expenses in the amount of SIX THOUSAND THREE 6 HUNDRED DOLLARS and 00/100 ($6,300) as authorized by the Equal Access to Justice Act 7 (EAJA), 28 U.S.C. § 2412(d), be awarded subject to the terms of the Stipulation. 9 IT IS SO ORDERED. 10 1 |! Dated: January 22, 2025 12 13 ___ DENNIS M. COTA 14 UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 STIPULATION FOR THE AWARD AND PAYMENT OF ATTORNEY FEES AND 28 || EXPENSES PURUSANT TO THE EQUAL ACCESS TO JUSTICE ACT; [PROPOSED] ORDER - 3

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

1 MARGARET LEHRKIND SBCA # 314717 2 Lehrkind Law Office, P.C. 3 2625 Alcatraz Ave, # 208 Berkeley, CA 94705 4 Tel: 510-590-1907 Margaret@LehrkindLawOffice.com 5

6 7 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 8 EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA 9 SHERMAN WALKER, CASE NO.: 2:24-cv-01956-DMC 10 Plaintiff, STIPULATION FOR THE AWARD AND 11 PAYMENT OF ATTORNEY FEES AND vs. EXPENSES PURUSANT TO THE EQUAL 12 ACCESS TO JUSTICE ACT; [PROPOSED] 13 ACTING COMMISSIONER OF SOCIAL ORDER SECURITY, 14 Defendant 15 16 The parties, through their respective counsel, hereby agree that attorney fees in the 17 18 amount of $6,300 shall be awarded to Plaintiff pursuant to the Equal Access to Justice Act, 28 19 U.S.C. § 2412 and costs of $0, pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1920. This amount represents 20 compensation for all legal services rendered on behalf of Plaintiff by counsel in connection with 21 this civil action, in accordance with 28 U.S.C. §§ 1920; 2412(d). Such attorney fees shall be 22 subject to verification that Plaintiff has no debt which qualifies for offset, pursuant to the 23 Treasury Offset Program as discussed in Astrue v. Ratliff, 130 S. Ct. 2521 (2010). 24 25 If the U.S. Department of the Treasury determines that Plaintiff’s EAJA fees are not 26 subject to any offset allowed under the Department of the Treasury’s Offset Program, then the 27 STIPULATION FOR THE AWARD AND PAYMENT OF ATTORNEY FEES AND 28 EXPENSES PURUSANT TO THE EQUAL ACCESS TO JUSTICE ACT; [PROPOSED] ORDER - 1 1 check or electronic funds transfer for EAJA fees shall be made payable to Plaintiff’s attorney, 2 Margaret Lehrkind, based upon Plaintiff’s assignment of these amounts to her. See Exhibit – 3 Retainer Agreement. If Plaintiff has a debt, then any remaining funds after offset shall be made 4 5 payable to Plaintiff and mailed to counsel’s address. 6 This stipulation constitutes a compromise settlement of Plaintiff’s request for EAJA 7 attorney fees and expenses and does not constitute an admission of liability on the part of 8 Defendant under the EAJA or otherwise. Payment of the agreed amount shall constitute a 9 complete release from, and bar to, any and all claims that Plaintiff and/or Plaintiff’s counsel, 10 including Lehrkind Law Office, P.C., may have relating to EAJA attorney fees and expenses in 11 12 connection with this action. 13 This award is without prejudice to the rights of Plaintiff’s counsel to seek Social Security 14 Act attorney fees under 42 U.S.C. § 406, subject to the offset provisions of the EAJA. 15 16 DATE: January 22, 2025 Respectfully submitted, 17 18 Lehrkind Law Office, P.C.

19 By: /s/ Margaret Lehrkind 20 Margaret Lehrkind Attorney for Plaintiff 21 DATE: January 22, 2025 By: /s/ Margaret Branick-Abilla * 22 Margaret Branick-Abilla 23 *As authorized via email on 1/22/25 Special Assistant United States Attorney 24 Attorney for Defendant

26 27 STIPULATION FOR THE AWARD AND PAYMENT OF ATTORNEY FEES AND 28 EXPENSES PURUSANT TO THE EQUAL ACCESS TO JUSTICE ACT; [PROPOSED] ORDER - 2 1 ORDER 3 || Based upon the parties’ Stipulation for the Award and Payment of Equal Access to Justice Act 4 and Expenses (the “Stipulation”), > IT IS ORDERED that fees and expenses in the amount of SIX THOUSAND THREE 6 HUNDRED DOLLARS and 00/100 ($6,300) as authorized by the Equal Access to Justice Act 7 (EAJA), 28 U.S.C. § 2412(d), be awarded subject to the terms of the Stipulation. 9 IT IS SO ORDERED. 10 1 |! Dated: January 22, 2025 12 13 ___ DENNIS M. COTA 14 UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 STIPULATION FOR THE AWARD AND PAYMENT OF ATTORNEY FEES AND 28 || EXPENSES PURUSANT TO THE EQUAL ACCESS TO JUSTICE ACT; [PROPOSED] ORDER - 3

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

(SS) Walker v. Commissioner of Social Security, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/ss-walker-v-commissioner-of-social-security-caed-2025.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack