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.)

Download PDF
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?