Burton v. Commissioner of Social Security

Filing 30

STIPULATION AND ORDER signed by Magistrate Judge Dale A. Drozd on 6/26/12 APPROVING and AUTHORIZING Attorney's Fees Pursuant to the Equal Access to Justice Act, 28 USC Section 2412(d). (Meuleman, A)

Download PDF
1 2 3 4 5 6 BENJAMIN B. WAGNER United States Attorney DONNA L. CALVERT, IL SBN 6191786 Acting Regional Chief Counsel, Region IX Social Security Administration DAVID LERCH, CSBN 229411 Special Assistant United States Attorney 333 Market Street, Suite 1500 San Francisco, California 94105 Telephone: (415) 977-8936 Facsimile: (415) 744-0134 E-Mail: David.Lerch@ssa.gov 7 Attorneys for Defendant 8 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT, 9 EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA 10 SACRAMENTO DIVISION 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 DONALD M. BURTON, ) ) Plaintiff, ) ) vs. ) ) MICHAEL J. ASTRUE, ) Commissioner of Social Security, ) ) Defendant. ) __________________________________ ) CASE NO. 2:10-cv-1279-DAD STIPULATION AND PROPOSED ORDER SETTLING ATTORNEY’S FEES PURSUANT TO THE EQUAL ACCESS TO JUSTICE ACT, 28 U.S.C. § 2412(d) 18 IT IS HEREBY STIPULATED by and between the parties through their undersigned 19 counsel, subject to the approval of the Court, that Plaintiff be awarded attorney fees under the 20 Equal Access to Justice Act (EAJA), 28 U.S.C. § 2412(d), in the amount of SIX THOUSAND 21 DOLLARS AND NO CENTS ($6,000). This amount represents compensation for all legal 22 services rendered on behalf of Plaintiff by counsel in connection with this civil action, in 23 accordance with 28 U.S.C. § 2412(d). 24 After the Court issues an order for EAJA fees to Plaintiff, the government will consider 25 the matter of Plaintiff’s assignment of EAJA fees to Plaintiff's attorney. Pursuant to Astrue v. 26 Ratliff, 130 S.Ct. 2521 (2010), the ability to honor the assignment will depend on whether the 27 fees are subject to any offset allowed under the United States Department of the Treasury’s 28 1 Stipulation and Proposed Order Settling Attorney’s Fees Pursuant To The Equal Access To Justice Act, 28 U.S.C. § 2412(d) 1 Offset Program. After the order for EAJA fees is entered, the government will determine 2 whether they are subject to any offset. 3 Fees shall be made payable to Plaintiff, but if the Department of the Treasury determines 4 that Plaintiff does not owe a federal debt, then the government shall cause the payment of fees to 5 be made directly to Ana Molleda, pursuant to the assignment executed by Plaintiff. Any 6 payments made shall be delivered to Plaintiff’s counsel. 7 This stipulation constitutes a compromise settlement of Plaintiff's request for EAJA 8 attorney fees, expenses and costs, and does not constitute an admission of liability on the part of 9 Defendant under the EAJA. Payment of the agreed amount shall constitute a complete release 10 from, and bar to, any and all claims that Plaintiff and/or Plaintiff's counsel may have relating to 11 EAJA attorney fees and expenses and costs in connection with this action. 12 13 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. 14 15 Respectfully submitted, 16 17 Dated: June 22, 2012 /s/ Ana L. Molleda Ana L. Molleda, Attorney for Plaintiff [as authorized by email] Dated: June 25, 2012 BENJAMIN B. WAGNER United States Attorney DONNA L. CALVERT Acting Regional Chief Counsel, Region IX Social Security Administration 18 19 20 21 22 23 By: 24 /s/ David Lerch DAVID LERCH Special Assistant U.S. Attorney 25 Attorneys for Defendant 26 27 28 2 Stipulation and Proposed Order Settling Attorney’s Fees Pursuant To The Equal Access To Justice Act, 28 U.S.C. § 2412(d) 1 2 3 ORDER APPROVED AND SO ORDERED: DATED: June 26, 2012. 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 Ddad1\orders.soc sec\burton1279.stiporder.attyfees.eaja.wpd 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 3 Stipulation and Proposed Order Settling Attorney’s Fees Pursuant To The Equal Access To Justice Act, 28 U.S.C. § 2412(d)

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?