Acosta v. Commissioner of Social Security

Filing 23

STIPULATION and ORDER Settling Attorneys Fees signed by Magistrate Judge Gregory G. Hollows on 12/01/10. (Benson, A.)

Download PDF
(SS) Acosta v. Commissioner of Social Security Doc. 23 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 BENJAMIN B. WAGNER United States Attorney LUCILLE GONZALES MEIS Regional Chief Counsel, Region IX Social Security Administration ARMAND D. ROTH Special Assistant United States Attorney California Bar No. 214624 333 Market Street, Suite 1500 San Francisco, California 94105 Telephone: (415) 977-8924 Facsimile: (415) 744-0134 E-Mail:Armand.Roth@ssa.gov Attorneys for Defendant Commissioner of Social Security UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA SACRAMENTO DIVISION LOUIS ACOSTA, ) ) Plaintiff, ) ) v. ) ) MICHAEL J. ASTRUE, ) Commissioner of ) Social Security, ) ) Defendant. ) _________________________________) CIVIL NO. 09-CV-02946-GGH STIPULATION AND ORDER SETTLING ATTORNEY'S 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 under the Equal Access to Justice Act (EAJA), 28 U.S.C. 2412(d), in the amount of FOUR THOUSAND THREE HUNDRED NINETY-TWO DOLLARS AND TWELVE CENTS ($4,392.12). 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. 2412(d). If Plaintiff's attorney provides the government with a copy of Plaintiff's assignment of EAJA fees to Plaintiff's attorney within four weeks of the Court's order adopting this stipulation, the government will consider the assignment. Pursuant to Astrue v. Ratliff, - S.Ct. - , 2010 WL 2346547 Dockets.Justia.com 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 (U.S. June 14, 2010), the ability to honor the assignment will depend on whether the fees are subject to any offset 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 Plaintiff's attorney provides the government with a copy of Plaintiff's assignment and the Department of the Treasury determines that Plaintiff does not owe a federal debt, then the government shall cause the payment of fees to be made directly to Plaintiff's attorney pursuant to the assignment executed by Plaintiff. Any payments made shall be delivered to Plaintiff's counsel. 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. Payment of FOUR THOUSAND THREE HUNDRED NINETY-TWO DOLLARS AND TWELVE CENTS ($4,392.12) shall constitute a complete release from and bar to any and all claims Plaintiff may have relating to EAJA fees in connection with this action. Any payment shall be delivered to Plaintiff's counsel. This award is without prejudice to the rights of Plaintiff's counsel to seek Social Security Act attorney fees under 42 U.S.C. 406, subject to the provisions of the EAJA. Respectfully submitted, Dated: November 23, 2010 /s/ Joseph Fraulob JOSEPH FRAULOB (As authorized via email) Attorney for Plaintiff Dated: November 23, 2010 BENJAMIN B. WAGNER United States Attorney LUCILLE GONZALES MEIS Regional Chief Counsel, Region IX Social Security Administration /s/Armand Roth ARMAND ROTH Special Assistant U.S. Attorney Attorneys for Defendant -2 - 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 APPROVED AND SO ORDERED: Dated: December 1, 2010 ORDER /s/ Gregory G. Hollows GREGORY G. HOLLOWS UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE -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?