(SS) Rodriguez v. Commissioner of Social Security
STIPULATION and ORDER FOR THE AWARD AND PAYMENT OF ATTORNEY FEES AND EXPENSES PURSUANT TO THE EQUAL ACCESS TO JUSTICE ACT; ORDER RE: STIPULATION AND DENYING MOTION FOR ATTORNEY'S FEES AS MOOT. Order signed by Magistrate Judge Sheila K. Oberto on 9/16/2022. (Kusamura, W)
Jonathan O. Peña, Esq.
CA Bar ID No.: 278044
Peña & Bromberg, PLC
2440 Tulare St., Ste. 320
Fresno, CA 93721
Attorney for Plaintiff, Jose M Rodriguez
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA
12 Jose M Rodriguez,
Case No. 1:21-cv-00014-SKO
16 Kilolo Kijakazi, Acting
Commissioner of Social Security,
STIPULATION FOR THE AWARD
AND PAYMENT OF ATTORNEY
FEES AND EXPENSES PURSUANT
TO THE EQUAL ACCESS TO
JUSTICE ACT; ORDER RE:
STIPULATION AND DENYING
MOTION FOR ATTORNEY’S FEES
(Docs. 23 & 25)
IT IS HEREBY STIPULATED by and between the parties through their
22 undersigned counsel, subject to the approval of the Court, that Plaintiff be awarded
23 attorney fees and expenses in the amount of SEVEN THOUSAND DOLLARS and
24 00/100 ($7,000.00) under the Equal Access to Justice Act (EAJA), 28 U.S.C. § 2412(d),
25 and cost in the amount of zero dollars ($0.00) under 28 U.S.C. §1920. This amount
26 represents compensation for all legal services rendered on behalf of Plaintiff by counsel
27 in connection with this civil action, in accordance with 28 U.S.C. § 2412(d).
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
the order for EAJA fees is entered, the government will determine whether they are
subject to any offset.
Fees shall be made payable to Plaintiff, but if the Department of the Treasury
determines that Plaintiff does not owe a federal debt, then the government shall cause
the payment of fees, expenses and costs to be made directly to Counsel, pursuant to
the assignment executed by Plaintiff. Any payments made shall be delivered to
Plaintiff’s counsel, Jonathan O. Peña.
This stipulation constitutes a compromise settlement of Plaintiff’s request for
EAJA attorney fees, and does not constitute an admission of liability on the part of
Defendant under the EAJA or otherwise. Payment of the agreed amount shall
constitute a complete release from, and bar to, any and all claims that Plaintiff and/or
Counsel including Counsel’s firm may have relating to EAJA attorney fees in
connection with this action.
This award is without prejudice to the rights of Counsel and/or Counsel’s firm
to seek Social Security Act attorney fees under 42 U.S.C. § 406(b), subject to the
savings clause provisions of the EAJA.
Dated: September 15, 2022
/s/ Jonathan O. Peña
JONATHAN O. PEÑA
Attorney for Plaintiff
Dated: September 15, 2022
PHILLIP A. TALBERT
United States Attorney
PETER K. THOMPSON
Acting Regional Chief Counsel, Region IX
Social Security Administration
By: _*_Sathya Oum
Special Assistant U.S. Attorney
Attorneys for Defendant
(*Permission to use electronic signature
obtained via email on September 8, 2022).
Based upon the parties’ Stipulation for the Award and Payment of Equal Access
12 to Justice Act Fees and Expenses (the “Stipulation”) (Doc. 25),
IT IS ORDERED that fees and expenses in the amount of SEVEN THOUSAND
15 DOLLARS and 00/100 ($7,000.00) as authorized by the Equal Access to Justice Act
16 (EAJA), 28 U.S.C. § 2412(d), be awarded subject to the terms of the Stipulation.
IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that Plaintiff’s motion for attorney’s fees (Doc.
19 23) is DENIED as MOOT.
IT IS SO ORDERED.
/s/ Sheila K. Oberto
September 16, 2022
UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE
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?