Granados v. Commissioner of Social Security
Filing
28
ORDER for the Award of Attorney Fees Under the Equal Access to Justice Act, signed by Magistrate Judge Gary S. Austin on 1/29/18. (Marrujo, C)
1 Jonathan O. Peña, Esq.
CA Bar ID No.: 278044
2 Peña & Bromberg, PLC
2440 Tulare Street, 3rd Floor
3
Suite 320
4 Fresno, CA 93721
5 Telephone: 559-412-5390
Facsimile:866-282-6709
6 info@jonathanpena.com
7
Attorney for Plaintiff, Paul Vinton Granados, Jr.
8
9
10
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA
11
12 PAUL VINTON GRANADOS,JR.,
Case No. 1:16-cv-1123-GSA
13
STIPULATION AND ORDER FOR THE
AWARD OF ATTORNEY FEES UNDER
THE EQUAL ACCESS TO JUSTICE ACT
(EAJA)
28 U.S.C. § 2412(d)
14
15
Plaintiff,
v.
16 NANCY A. BERRYHILL, Acting
Commissioner of Social Security,
17
Defendant.
18
19
TO THE HONORABLE GARY S. AUSTIN, MAGISTRATE JUDGE OF THE
20 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT:
21
The Parties through their undersigned counsel, subject to the Court’s approval,
22 stipulate that Plaintiff be awarded attorney fees in the amount of SIX THOUSAND,
23 FIVE HUNDRED DOLLARS ($6,500.00) under the Equal Access to Justice Act
24 (EAJA), 28 U.S.C. § 2412(d). This amount represents compensation for all legal
25 services rendered on behalf of Plaintiff by counsel in connection with this civil action,
26 in accordance with 28 U.S.C. § 2412(d).
27
28
1
After the Court issues an order for EAJA fees to Plaintiff, the government will
2 consider the matter of Plaintiff’s assignment of EAJA fees to counsel. Pursuant to
3 Astrue v. Ratliff, 560 U.S. 586, 598, 130 S.Ct. 2521, 177 L.Ed.2d 91 (2010), the ability
4 to honor the assignment will depend on whether the fees are subject to any offset
5 allowed under the United States Department of the Treasury’s Offset Program. After
6
the order for EAJA fees is entered, the government will determine whether they are
7
subject to any offset.
8
Fees shall be made payable to Plaintiff, but if the Department of the Treasury
9
determines that Plaintiff does not owe a federal debt, then the government shall cause
10
the payment of fees, expenses and costs to be made directly to counsel, pursuant to the
11
assignment executed by Plaintiff. Any payments made shall be delivered to Plaintiff’s
12
counsel, Jonathan O. Peña.
13
This stipulation constitutes a compromise settlement of Plaintiff’s request for
14
15 EAJA fees, and does not constitute an admission of liability on the part of Defendant
16 under EAJA or otherwise. Payment of SIX THOUSAND, FIVE HUNDRED
17 DOLLARS ($6,500.00) in EAJA attorney fees, shall constitute a complete release from,
18 and bar to, any and all claims that Plaintiff and Plaintiff’s attorney, Jonathan O. Peña,
19 may have relating to EAJA attorney fees in connection with this action.
20
This award is without prejudice to the rights of Plaintiff’s attorney to seek Social
21 Security Act attorney fees under 42 U.S.C. § 406(b), subject to the savings clause
22 provisions of the EAJA.
23
24
25
26
Dated: January 23, 2018
Respectfully submitted,
/s/ Jonathan O. Peña
JONATHAN O. PEÑA
Attorney for Plaintiff
27
28
-2-
1 Dated: January 23, 2018
2
3
MCGREGOR W. SCOTT
United States Attorney
DEBORAH LEE STACHEL
Regional Chief Counsel, Region IX
Social Security Administration
4
By: /s/ Ben A. Porter
BEN A. PORTER
Special Assistant U.S. Attorney
(As authorized by e-mail dated
January 23, 2018)
Attorneys for Defendant
5
6
7
8
9
10
ORDER
Pursuant to the stipulation of the parties (Doc. 26), Plaintiff shall be awarded
11 attorney’s fees under the Equal Access to Justice Act (EAJA), 28 U.S.C. § 2412(d), in
12 the amount of SIX THOUSAND, FIVE HUNDRED DOLLARS ($6,500.00). Payment
13 shall be made pursuant to Astrue v. Ratcliff, 130 S. Ct. 2521 (2010) in accordance with
14 the terms of the stipulation outlined above.
15
16
17
IT IS SO ORDERED.
Dated:
January 29, 2018
/s/ Gary S. Austin
UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
-3-
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?