Garcia v. CSS

Filing 30

STIPULATION AND ORDER signed by Magistrate Judge Allison Claire on 12/11/14 ORDERING the court will approve the parties' stipulation as to plaintiff's receipt of Equal Access to Justice Act ("EAJA") fees under 28 U.S.C. § 2412(d). In light of the parties' superseding stipulation the court will also vacate plaintiff's November 21, 2014, petition for attorney's fees.ECF No. 27 .(Becknal, R)

Download PDF
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 9 EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA 10 SACRAMENTO DIVISION 11 12 13 14 LETICIA GARCIA, Plaintiff, v. 15 16 17 18 CAROLYN W. COLVIN, Acting Commissioner of Social Security, Defendant. ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) No. 2:13-cv-01075-AC STIPULATION AND ORDER FOR THE AWARD AND PAYMENT OF ATTORNEY FEES AND EXPENSES 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 21 counsel, subject to the approval of the Court, that Plaintiff, Leticia Garcia, be awarded attorney 22 fees and expenses in the amount of seven thousand eight hundred dollars ($7,800) under the 23 Equal Access to Justice Act (EAJA), 28 U.S.C. § 2412(d). This amount represents 24 compensation for all legal services rendered on behalf of Plaintiff by counsel in connection 25 with this civil action, in accordance with 28 U.S.C. § 1920; 2412(d). 26 After the Court issues an order for EAJA fees to Leticia Garcia, the government will 27 consider the matter of Leticia Garcia’s assignment of EAJA fees to John V. Johnson. Pursuant 28 to Astrue v. Ratliff, 130 S.Ct. 2521, 2529 (2010), the ability to honor the assignment will 1 1 depend on whether the fees are subject to any offset allowed under the United States 2 Department of the Treasury’s Offset Program. After the order for EAJA fees is entered, the 3 government will determine whether they are subject to any offset. 4 Fees shall be made payable to Leticia Garcia, but if the Department of the Treasury 5 determines that Leticia Garcia does not owe a federal debt, then the government shall cause the 6 payment of fees, expenses and costs to be made directly to John V. Johnson, pursuant to the 7 assignment executed by Leticia Garcia. Any payments made shall be delivered to John V. 8 Johnson. 9 This stipulation constitutes a compromise settlement of Leticia Garcia’s request for 10 EAJA attorney fees, and does not constitute an admission of liability on the part of Defendant 11 under the EAJA or otherwise. Payment of the agreed amount shall constitute a complete 12 release from, and bar to, any and all claims that Leticia Garcia and/or John V. Johnson 13 including the Law Office of John V. Johnson may have relating to EAJA attorney fees in 14 connection with this action. 15 // 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 2 1 This award is without prejudice to the rights of John V. Johnson and/or the Law Office 2 of John V. Johnson to seek Social Security Act attorney fees under 42 U.S.C. § 406(b), subject 3 to the savings clause provisions of the EAJA. 4 5 Respectfully submitted, 6 Dated: Dec. 11, 2014 LAW OFFICES OF JOHN V. JOHNSON 7 By: 8 9 10 11 Dated: Dec. 11, 2014 BENJAMIN B. WAGNER United States Attorney DONNA L. CALVERT Regional Chief Counsel, Region IX Social Security Administration 12 13 14 By: 15 16 17 /s/ Jeffrey Chen for John V. Johnson* JOHN V. JOHNSON * By email authorization on Dec. 8, 2014 Attorneys for Plaintiff /s/ Jeffrey Chen JEFFREY CHEN Special Assistant United States Attorney Attorneys for Defendant 18 19 ORDER 20 21 22 The court will approve the parties’ stipulation as to plaintiff’s receipt of Equal Access to Justice Act (“EAJA”) fees under 28 U.S.C. § 2412(d). In light of the parties’ superseding 23 24 25 26 27 stipulation the court will also vacate plaintiff’s November 21, 2014, petition for attorney’s fees. ECF No. 27. APPROVED AND SO ORDERED. DATED: December 11, 2014 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?