Munoz Ferrer v. Commissioner of Social Security

Filing 27

STIPULATION and ORDER FOR THE AWARD AND PAYMENT OF ATTORNEY FEES PURSUANT TO THE EQUAL ACCESS TO JUSTICE ACT, 28 U.S.C. § 2412(d), signed by Magistrate Judge Gary S. Austin on 1/23/2020. (Apodaca, P)

Download PDF
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 McGREGOR W. SCOTT United States Attorney DEBORAH LEE STACHEL Regional Chief Counsel, Region IX Social Security Administration MARGARET BRANICK-ABILLA, CSBN 223600 Special Assistant United States Attorney 160 Spear Street, Suite 800 San Francisco, California 94105 Telephone: (415) 977-8929 Facsimile: (415) 744-0134 E-Mail: Margaret.Branick-Abilla@ssa.gov 8 9 Attorneys for Defendant UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 10 EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA 11 FRESNO DIVISION 12 13 ISRAEL MUNOZ FERRER, 14 Plaintiff, 15 vs. 16 17 ANDREW SAUL, Commissioner of Social Security, 18 Defendant. 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) Case No. 1:18-cv-00494-GSA STIPULATION AND ORDER FOR THE AWARD AND PAYMENT OF ATTORNEY FEES PURSUANT TO THE EQUAL ACCESS TO JUSTICE ACT, 28 U.S.C. § 2412(d) 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 in the amount of SIX THOUSAND, SEVEN HUNDRED, FIFTEEN DOLLARS AND ZERO CENTS ($6,715.00) under the Equal Access to Justice Act (EAJA), 28 U.S.C. § 2412(d). 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). 26 27 28 /// /// Stipulation and [Proposed] Order 1:18-cv-00494-GSA 1 1 After the Court issues an order for EAJA fees to Plaintiff, the government will consider 2 the matter of Plaintiff’s assignment of EAJA fees to counsel Kelsey Brown, Mackenzie Legal, 3 PLLC. Pursuant to Astrue v. Ratliff, 560 U.S. 586, 598 (2010), the ability to honor the 4 assignment will depend on whether the fees are subject to any offset allowed under the United 5 States Department of the Treasury’s Offset Program. After the order for EAJA fees is entered, 6 the government will determine whether they are subject to any offset. 7 Fees shall be made payable to Plaintiff, but if the Department of the Treasury determines 8 that Plaintiff does not owe a federal debt, then the government shall cause the payment of fees to 9 be made directly to counsel, pursuant to the assignment executed by Plaintiff. Any payments 10 made shall be delivered to counsel. This stipulation constitutes a compromise settlement of Plaintiff’s request for EAJA 11 12 attorney fees, and does not constitute an admission of liability on the part of Defendant under the 13 EAJA or otherwise. Payment of the agreed amount shall constitute a complete release from, and 14 bar to, any and all claims that Plaintiff and/or counsel Kelsey Brown, including Mackenzie 15 Legal, PLLC, may have relating to EAJA attorney fees in connection with this action. 16 /// 17 /// 18 /// 19 /// 20 /// 21 /// 22 /// 23 /// 24 /// 25 /// 26 /// 27 /// 28 /// Stipulation and [Proposed] Order 1:18-cv-00494-GSA 2 1 2 This award is without prejudice to the rights of counsel to seek Social Security Act attorney fees under 42 U.S.C. § 406(b), subject to the savings clause provisions of the EAJA. 3 4 Respectfully submitted, Dated: January 22, 2020 MACKENZIE LEGAL, PLLC 5 6 By: /s/ Kelsey Mackenzie Brown* KELSEY MACKENZIE BROWN Attorneys for Plaintiff [*As authorized by e-mail on Jan. 22, 2020] 7 8 9 10 Dated: January 23, 2020 McGREGOR W. SCOTT United States Attorney DEBORAH LEE STACHEL Regional Chief Counsel, Region IX Social Security Administration 11 12 13 14 By: /s/ Margaret Branick-Abilla MARGARET BRANICK-ABILLA Special Assistant United States Attorney Attorneys for Defendant 15 16 17 18 19 20 IT IS SO ORDERED. Dated: January 23, 2020 /s/ Gary S. Austin UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 Stipulation and [Proposed] Order 1:18-cv-00494-GSA 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?