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)
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?