Hunt v. SSA

Filing 25

STIPULATION and ORDER for the award of Attorney fees signed by Magistrate Judge Deborah Barnes on 4/12/17. (Mena-Sanchez, L)

Download PDF
1 PHILLIP A. TALBERT United States Attorney 2 DEBORAH LEE STACHEL, CSBN 230138 3 Regional Chief Counsel, Region IX Social Security Administration 4 DONNA W. ANDERSON, PSBN 46355 5 Special Assistant United States Attorney Assistant Regional Counsel 6 Social Security Administration, Region IX 160 Spear Street, Suite 800 7 San Francisco, California 94105 8 Tel: (415) 977-8943 9 Fax: (415) 744-0134 E-mail: 10 1 11 Attorneys for Defendant UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA SACRAMENTO DIVISION 12 13 14 15 KAREN HUNT, No. 2:15-cv-0509-DB 16 Plaintiff, 17 v. 18 STIPULATION AND ORDER FOR THE AWARD OF ATTORNEY FEES UNDER THE EQUAL ACCESS TO JUSTICE ACT (EAJA) 28 U.S.C. § 2412(d) NANCY A. BERRYHILL, Acting 19 Commissioner of Social Security, 20 Defendant. 21 The Parties through their undersigned counsel, subject to the Court’s approval, 22 stipulate that Plaintiff be awarded attorney fees under the Equal Access to Justice Act 23 (EAJA), 28 U.S.C. § 2412(d), in the amount of FIVE THOUSAND DOLLARS 24 25 1 Nancy A. Berryhill is now the Acting Commissioner of Social Security. Pursuant to Rule 26 25(d) of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure, Nancy A. Berryhill should be substituted for Acting 27 Commissioner Carolyn W. Colvin as the defendant in this suit. No further action needs to be taken to 28 continue this suit by reason of the last sentence of section 205(g) of the Social Security Act, 42 U.S.C. § 405(g). 1 ($5,000.00). This amount represents compensation for all legal services rendered on 2 behalf of Plaintiff by counsel in connection with this civil action, in accordance with 28 3 U.S.C. § 2412(d). 4 After the Court issues an order for EAJA fees to Plaintiff, the government will 5 consider the matter of Plaintiff’s assignment of EAJA fees to counsel. Pursuant to 6 Astrue v. Ratliff, 560 U.S. 586, 598, 130 S.Ct. 2521, 177 L.Ed.2d 91 (2010), the ability 7 to honor the assignment will depend on whether the fees are subject to any offset 8 allowed under the United States Department of the Treasury’s Offset Program. After 9 the order for EAJA fees is entered, the government will determine whether they are 10 subject to any offset. 11 Fees shall be made payable to Plaintiff, but if the Department of the Treasury 12 determines that Plaintiff does not owe a federal debt, then the government shall cause 13 the payment of fees, expenses and costs to be made directly to counsel, pursuant to the 14 15 assignment executed by Plaintiff. Any payments made shall be delivered to counsel. 16 This stipulation constitutes a compromise settlement of Plaintiff’s request for 17 EAJA fees, and does not constitute an admission of liability on the part of Defendant 18 under the EAJA. Payment of FIVE THOUSAND DOLLARS ($5,000.00) in EAJA 19 attorney fees shall constitute a complete release from, and bar to, any and all claims that 20 Plaintiff Karen Hunt and Plaintiff’s attorney may have relating to EAJA attorney fees in 21 connection with this action. 22 // 23 // 24 // 25 // 26 // 27 // 28 -2- 1 This award is without prejudice to the rights of Plaintiff’s attorney to seek Social 2 Security Act attorney fees under 42 U.S.C. § 406(b), subject to the savings clause 3 provision of the EAJA. 4 Respectfully submitted, 5 6 Dated: April 12, 2017 7 8 /s/ Wade Askew* WADE ASKEW Attorney for Plaintiff Karen Hunt (*By email authorization on 04/11/17) 9 10 11 Dated: April 12, 2017 12 13 PHILLIP A. TALBERT United States Attorney DEBORAH LEE STACHEL Regional Chief Counsel, Region IX Social Security Administration 14 By: /s/ Donna W. Anderson DONNA W. ANDERSON Special Assistant U.S. Attorney Attorneys for Defendant 15 16 17 18 ORDER 19 20 Pursuant to the parties’ stipulation, (ECF No. 24), IT IS SO ORDERED. 21 DATED: April 12, 2017 22 /s/ DEBORAH BARNES UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE 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?