Burley v. Commissioner of Social Security

Filing 23

STIPULATION and ORDER signed by Magistrate Judge Edmund F. Brennan on 08/03/17 ORDERING that Plaintiff be awarded attorney fees under the EAJA in the amount of $5550.00. (Benson, A.)

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 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 12 EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA, SACRAMENTO BRANCH 13 14 RONALD LEE BURLEY, Plaintiff, 15 16 vs. 17 NANCY A. BERRYHILL, Acting Commissioner of Social Security, 18 19 Case No.: 2:16-cv-00485-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) Defendant 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 IT IS HEREBY STIPULATED by and between the parties through their undersigned counsel, subject to the approval of the Court, that Plaintiff be awarded attorney fees under the EAJA in the amount of FIVE THOUSAND FIVE HUNDRED AND FIFTY DOLLARS AND 00 CENTS ($5550.00). This amount represents a negotiated compensation for all legal services rendered on behalf of Plaintiff, to date, by counsel in connection with this civil action, in accordance with 28 U.S.C. § 2412. After the Court issues an order for EAJA fees and expenses to Plaintiff, the 27 government will consider the matter of Plaintiff's assignment of EAJA fees and expenses to 28 Plaintiff's attorney. Pursuant to Astrue v. Ratliff, 130 S.Ct. 2521 (2010), the ability to honor the 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 assignment will depend on whether the fees and expenses are subject to any offset allowed under 2 the United States Department of the Treasury's Offset Program. After the order for EAJA fees 3 and expenses is entered, the government will determine whether they are subject to any offset. 4 5 6 7 8 9 Fees and expenses shall be made payable to Plaintiff, but if the Department of the Treasury determines that Plaintiff does not owe a federal debt, then the government shall cause the payment of fees, expenses and costs to be made directly to Shellie Lott, pursuant to the assignment executed by Plaintiff, attached to this filing. Any payments made shall be delivered to Plaintiff's counsel. This stipulation constitutes a compromise settlement of Plaintiff's request for EAJA attorney fees and expenses, and does not constitute an admission of liability on the part of 10 Defendant under the EAJA. Payment of the agreed amount shall constitute a complete release 11 from, and bar to, any and all claims that Plaintiff and/or Plaintiff's counsel may have relating to 12 EAJA attorney fees and expenses in connection with this action. 13 14 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. 15 Respectfully submitted, 16 17 Dated: August 1, 2017 18 19 /s/ Shellie Lott SHELLIE LOTT Attorney for Plaintiff PHILLIP A. TALBERT United States Attorney DEBORAH LEE STACHE Regional Chief Counsel 20 21 22 23 24 25 Date: August 1, 2017 /s/Carolyn Chen CAROLYN CHEN (As authorized via email on 8/1/17) Special Assistant United States Attorney 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 ORDER Pursuant to the stipulation for $5500.00, it is so ordered. 4 5 DATE: August 3, 2017. 6 7 8 EDMUND F. BRENNAN UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 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?