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)
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: donna.w.anderson@ssa.gov
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?