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)
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?