Pin v. Commissioner of Social Security
Filing
23
STIPULATION and ORDER signed by Magistrate Judge Edmund F. Brennan on 6/12/2017 ORDERING that plaintiff is awarded attorney fees under the EAJA in the amount of $7252.99. (Zignago, K.)
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
SHELLIE LOTT, SBN: 246202
Cerney Kreuze & Lott, LLP
42 N. Sutter Street, Suite 400
Stockton, California 95202
Telephone: (209) 948-9384
Facsimile: (209) 948-0706
Linda Ziskin, SBN: 196293
Ziskin Law Office
PO Box 753833
Las Vegas, NV 89136
Telephone: (503) 889-0472
Facsimile: (888) 889-5776
Attorneys for Plaintiff
10
11
12
13
IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
14
EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA, SACRAMENTO BRANCH
15
16
17
NUTH PHEAKDEY PIN,
18
Plaintiff,
19
vs.
20
COMMISSIONER OF SOCIAL SECURITY,
Case No.: 2:15-cv-02450-EFB
STIPULATION AND PROPOSED ORDER
FOR THE AWARD OF ATTORNEY FEES
PURSUANT TO THE EQUAL ACCESS TO
JUSTICE ACT, 28 U.S.C. § 2412(d)
21
22
Defendant
23
24
IT IS HEREBY STIPULATED by and between the parties through their undersigned
25
counsel, subject to the approval of the Court, that Plaintiff be awarded attorney fees under the
26
27
28
EAJA in the amount of SEVEN THOUSAND TWO HUNDRED FIFTY-TWO DOLLARS
AND 99 CENTS ($7252.99). This amount represents compensation for all legal services
STIPULATION AND PROPOSED ORDER FOR THE AWARD OF ATTORNEY FEES
PURSUANT TO THE EQUAL ACCESS TO JUSTICE ACT, 28 U.S.C. § 2412(d)
1
rendered on behalf of Plaintiff, to date, by counsel in connection with this civil action, in
2
accordance with 28 U.S.C. § 2412.
3
After the Court issues an order for EAJA fees and expenses to Plaintiff, the government
4
5
will consider the matter of Plaintiff's assignment of EAJA fees and expenses to Plaintiff's
6
attorney. Pursuant to Astrue v. Ratliff, 130 S.Ct. 2521 (2010), the ability to honor the
7
assignment will depend on whether the fees and expenses are subject to any offset allowed under
8
the United States Department of the Treasury's Offset Program. After the order for EAJA fees
9
and expenses is entered, the government will determine whether they are subject to any offset.
10
11
Fees and expenses 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 the
13
payment of fees, expenses and costs to be made directly to Plaintiff’s attorney, Shellie Lott, at
14
the law firm of Cerney, Kreuze and Lott, LLP, as captioned above, pursuant to the
15
assignment executed by Plaintiff. Any payments made shall be delivered directly to Plaintiff's
16
17
18
19
20
attorney at the address above.
This stipulation constitutes full settlement of Plaintiff's request for EAJA attorney fees
and expenses, and does not constitute an admission of liability on the part of Defendant under the
EAJA. Payment of the agreed amount shall constitute a complete release from, and bar to, any
21
and all claims that Plaintiff and/or Plaintiff's counsel may have relating to EAJA attorney fees
22
23
24
and expenses in connection with this action.
///
25
26
27
28
///
STIPULATION AND PROPOSED ORDER FOR THE AWARD OF ATTORNEY FEES
PURSUANT TO THE EQUAL ACCESS TO JUSTICE ACT, 28 U.S.C. § 2412(d)
1
2
3
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 offset provisions of the EAJA.
4
5
Respectfully submitted,
6
7
Dated: June 9, 2016
8
9
/s/ Linda Ziskin
Linda Ziskin
Of Attorneys for Plaintiff
PHILLIP A. TALBERT
United States Attorney
DEBORAH LEE STACHEL
Regional Chief Counsel
10
11
12
13
Date: June 9, 2017
14
15
/s/
Chantal Jenkins
(As authorized via email)
CHANTAL JENKINS
Special Assistant United States Attorney
16
ORDER
17
18
Pursuant to the stipulation, plaintiff is awarded attorney fees under the EAJA in the
19
amount of $7252.99.
20
21
22
So Ordered.
DATE: June 12, 2017.
23
24
25
26
27
28
STIPULATION AND PROPOSED ORDER FOR THE AWARD OF ATTORNEY 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?