Odom v. Commissioner of Social Security

Filing 25

Order granting Plaintiffs petition for attorney fees pursuant to the Equal Access to Justice Act, signed by Magistrate Judge Erica P. Grosjean on 1/8/2018. (Rosales, O)

Download PDF
1 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 2 EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA 3 4 ORDER GRANTING PLAINTIFF’S PETITION FOR ATTORNEY FEES PURSUANT TO THE EQUAL ACCESS TO JUSTICE ACT Plaintiff, 5 v. 6 7 Case No. 1:16-cv-00270-EPG ROBERT KENNETH ODOM, NANCY A. BERRYHILL, Acting Commissioner of Social Security, (ECF No. 23) 8 Defendant. 9 10 Plaintiff Robert Kenneth Odom filed a complaint challenging the denial of her 11 application for disability insurance benefits on August 10, 2015. (ECF No. 1.) On June 2, 2017, 12 the Court entered a final decision remanding the case to the Social Security Administration for 13 further proceedings. (ECF No. 21.) The Court entered judgment in Plaintiff’s favor. (ECF No. 14 22.) 15 Plaintiff now seeks attorney fees and expenses pursuant to the Equal Access to Justice 16 Act (28 U.S.C. § 2412(d)) (“EAJA”) in the amount of $3,806.44. (ECF No. 23.) Defendant 17 filed a response indicating that it had no objection to that amount. (ECF No. 24.) However, it 18 requested additional offset language be added to the order granting attorney fees. (Id.) Plaintiff 19 did not object insertion of the proposed offset language. 20 Accordingly, IT IS ORDERED that fees in the amount of $3,806.44 as authorized by 28 21 U.S.C. § 2412(d) be awarded the Law Offices of Lawrence D. Rohlfing subject to the 22 following: EAJA fees and expenses, are subject to any offsets allowed under the Treasury 23 Offset Program, as discussed in Astrue v. Ratliff, 130 S.Ct. 2521 (2010). 24 25 26 IT IS SO ORDERED. Dated: January 8, 2018 /s/ UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE 27 28 1 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 2

Disclaimer: Justia Dockets & Filings provides public litigation records from the federal appellate and district courts. These filings and docket sheets should not be considered findings of fact or liability, nor do they necessarily reflect the view of Justia.


Why Is My Information Online?