Plummer v. Commissioner of Social Security
Filing
25
STIPULATION and ORDER signed by Magistrate Judge Carolyn K. Delaney on 8/8/2018 AWARDING Attorney fees under the Equal Justice Act. (Washington, S)
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
MCGREGOR W. SCOTT
United States Attorney
DEBORAH LEE STACHEL
Regional Chief Counsel, Region IX
Social Security Administration
Chantal R. Jenkins, SBN PA 307531
Special Assistant United States Attorney
160 Spear Street, Suite 800
San Francisco, California 94105
Telephone: (415) 977-8931
Facsimile: (415) 744-0134
E-Mail: Chantal.Jenkins@ssa.gov
8
9
Attorneys for Defendant
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
10
EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA
11
SACRAMENTO DIVISION
12
13
LARRY GENE PLUMMER,
14
Plaintiff,
15
vs.
16
17
18
19
NANCY A. BERRYHILL,
Acting Commissioner of Social Security,
Defendant.
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
Case No.: 2:17-cv-02414-CKD
STIPULATION AND ORDER AWARDING
ATTORNEY FEES UNDER THE
EQUAL ACCESS TO JUSTICE ACT,
28 U.S.C. §§ 1920, 2412(d)
20
21
IT IS HEREBY STIPULATED by and between the parties, through their undersigned
22
counsel, subject to the Court’s approval, that Plaintiff be awarded attorney fees under the Equal
23
Access to Justice Act (EAJA), 28 U.S.C. §§ 1920, 2412(d), in the amount of EIGHT
24
THOUSAND DOLLARS AND 00 CENTS ($8,000.00). Additionally, it is stipulated by and
25
between parties, subject to approval of the Court, that Plaintiff be awarded costs in the amount of
26
FOUR HUNDRED TWENTY-FIVE DOLLARS AND 29/CENTS ($425.29) for the cost of his
27
fees in this matter. This amount represents compensation for all legal services rendered on
28
1
behalf of Plaintiff by counsel in connection with this civil action in accordance with 28 U.S.C.
2
§§ 1920, 2412(d).
3
After the Court issues an order for EAJA fees and expenses to Plaintiff, the government
4
will consider the matter of Plaintiff’s assignment of EAJA fees and expenses to Plaintiff’s
5
attorney. Pursuant to Astrue v. Ratliff, 130 S.Ct. 2521 (2010), the ability to honor the assignment
6
will depend on whether the fees and expenses are subject to any offset allowed under the United
7
States Department of the Treasury’s Offset Program. After the order for EAJA fees and
8
expenses is entered, the government will determine whether they are subject to any offset.
9
Fees shall be made payable to Plaintiff, but if the Department of the Treasury determines
10
that Plaintiff does not owe a federal debt, then the government shall cause the payment of fees
11
and expenses to be made directly to Ana L. Molleda, pursuant to the assignment executed by
12
Plaintiff. Any payments made shall be delivered to Plaintiff’s counsel.
13
This stipulation constitutes a compromise settlement of Plaintiff’s request for EAJA
14
attorney fees and expenses, and does not constitute an admission of liability on the part of
15
Defendant under the EAJA. Payment of the agreed amount shall constitute a complete release
16
from, and bar to, any and all claims that Plaintiff and/or Plaintiff’s counsel may have relating to
17
EAJA attorney fees and expenses in connection with this action.
18
19
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.
20
21
22
23
Respectfully submitted,
Dated: August 7, 2018
/s/ Ana L. Molleda by Chantal R. Jenkins*
Ana L. Molleda
*As authorized via email by Ana L. Molleda
on August 3, 2018
Attorney for Plaintiff
Dated: August 7, 2018
MCGREGOR W. SCOTT
United States Attorney
24
25
26
27
28
DEBORAH LEE STACHEL
Regional Chief Counsel, Region IX
Social Security Administration
1
2
3
By:
4
5
/s/ Chantal R. Jenkins
CHANTAL R. JENKINS
Special Assistant United States Attorney
6
7
8
ORDER
9
10
APPROVED AND SO ORDERED.
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
Dated: August 8, 2018
_____________________________________
CAROLYN K. DELANEY
UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE
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?