Gier v. Commissioner of Social Security
Filing
34
ORDER signed by Magistrate Judge Kendall J. Newman on 4/10/14 GRANTING 32 Motion for Attorney Fees. IT IS SO ORDERED that Plaintiff shall be awarded attorney fees in the amount of $3,250.00, as authorized by 28 USC Section 2412(d), subject to the terms of the above-referenced Stipulation. APPROVED AND SO ORDERED. (Meuleman, A)
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
BENJAMIN B. WAGNER
United States Attorney
DONNA L. CALVERT
Acting Regional Chief Counsel, Region IX
Social Security Administration
CAROLYN B. CHEN
Special Assistant United States Attorney
160 Spear Street, Suite 800
San Francisco, California 94105
Telephone: (415) 977-8956
Facsimile: (415) 744-0134
E-Mail: Carolyn.Chen@ssa.gov
9
10
11
12
Attorneys for Defendant
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA
SACRAMENTO DIVISION
13 DONALD GIER,
)
Plaintiff,
)
14
v.
)
15 CAROLYN W. COLVIN,
)
)
16 Acting Commissioner of
Social Security,
)
17
Defendant.
)
______________________________)
18
Case No. 2:13-CV-00012-KJN
STIPULATION AND ORDER
SETTLING ATTORNEY’S FEES PURSUANT TO
THE EQUAL ACCESS TO JUSTICE ACT,
28 U.S.C. § 2412(d)
19
20
IT IS HEREBY STIPULATED by and between the parties through their undersigned counsel,
21 subject to the approval of the Court, that Plaintiff be awarded attorney fees under the Equal Access to
22 Justice Act (EAJA), 28 U.S.C. § 2412(d), in the amount of THREE THOUSAND TWO HUNDRED
23 FIFTY DOLLARS AND 00/100 CENTS ($3,250.00). This amount represents compensation for all
24 legal services rendered on behalf of Plaintiff by counsel in connection with this civil action, in accordance
25 with 28 U.S.C. §§ 1920, 2412(d).
After the Court issues an order for EAJA fees to Plaintiff, the government will consider the
26
27 matter of Plaintiff's assignment of EAJA fees to Plaintiff's attorney. Pursuant to Ratliff v. Astrue, 130 S.
28 Ct. 2521 (U.S. June 14, 2010) the ability to honor the assignment will depend on whether the fees are
1
1 subject to any offset allowed under the United States Department of the Treasury’s Offset Program.
2 After the order for EAJA fees is entered, the government will determine whether they are subject to any
3 offset.
4
Fees shall be made payable to Plaintiff, but if the Department of the Treasury determines that
5 Plaintiff does not owe a federal debt, then the government shall cause the payment of fees to be made
6 directly to Plaintiff’s attorney Jesse Kaplan, pursuant to the assignment executed by Plaintiff. Any
7 payments made shall be delivered to Plaintiff’s counsel.
8
This stipulation constitutes a compromise settlement of Plaintiff’s request for EAJA attorney fees
9 and does not constitute an admission of liability on the part of Defendant under the EAJA. Payment of
10 the agreed amount shall constitute a complete release from, and bar to, any and all claims that Plaintiff
11 and/or Plaintiff’s counsel may have relating to EAJA attorney fees in connection with this action.
12
This award is without prejudice to the rights of Plaintiff’s counsel to seek Social Security Act
13 attorney fees under 42 U.S.C. § 406, subject to the provisions of the EAJA.
14
15
Respectfully submitted,
16 Date: April 10, 2014
s/ Jesse S. Kaplan
(As authorized by email on 4/9/2014)
JESSE S. KAPLAN
Attorney for Plaintiff
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
Date: April 10, 2014
BENJAMIN B. WAGNER
United States Attorney
By s/ Carolyn B. Chen
CAROLYN B. CHEN
Special Assistant U. S. Attorney
Attorneys for Defendant
25
26
27
28
2
1
2
3
ORDER
4
PURSUANT TO STIPULATION, IT IS SO ORDERED that Plaintiff shall be awarded attorney fees
5
in the amount of THREE THOUSAND TWO HUNDRED FIFTY DOLLARS AND ZERO CENTS
6
($3,250.00), as authorized by 28 U.S.C. § 2412(d), subject to the terms of the above-referenced
7
Stipulation.
8
9
10 APPROVED AND SO ORDERED. This order resolves docket number 32.
11
12 Dated: April 10, 2014
13
14
15
16
_____________________________________
KENDALL J. NEWMAN
UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
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?