(SS) Westfall v. Commissioner of Social Security

Filing 22

STIPULATION and ORDER signed by Magistrate Judge Deborah Barnes on 2/12/2021 AWARDING plaintiff attorney's fees under the EAJA in the amount of $8,000.00; DENYING AS MOOT 19 Motion for Attorney Fees. (Zignago, K.)

Download PDF
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 McGREGOR W. SCOTT United States Attorney DEBORAH LEE STACHEL Regional Chief Counsel, Region IX Social Security Administration MARCELO ILLARMO (MABN 670079) Special Assistant United States Attorney 160 Spear Street, Suite 800 San Francisco, California 94105 Telephone: (415) 977-8944 Facsimile: (415) 744-0134 Email: Marcelo.Illarmo@ssa.gov 8 9 Attorneys for Defendant UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 GLENN A. WESTFALL, ) ) Plaintiff ) ) v. ) ) ANDREW M. SAUL, ) Commissioner of Social Security, ) ) Defendant ) ) ____________________________________) No. 2:19-cv-00957-DB STIPULATION AND ORDER FOR AWARD OF ATTORNEY’S FEES UNDER THE EQUAL ACCESS TO JUSTICE ACT (EAJA) IT IS HEREBY STIPULATED by and between the parties through their undersigned counsel, 20 subject to the approval of the Court, that Plaintiff shall be awarded attorney’s fees under the Equal 21 Access to Justice Act (EAJA), 28 U.S.C. sec. 2412(d), in the amount of eight thousand dollars and 22 zero cents ($8,000.00); and no costs under 28 U.S.C. § 1920. This amount represents compensation 23 for all legal services rendered on behalf of Plaintiff by counsel in connection with this civil action, in 24 accordance with 28 U.S.C. §§ 1920; 2412(d). 25 26 After the Court issues an order for EAJA fees to Plaintiff, the government will consider the matter of Plaintiff’s assignment of EAJA fees to his counsel, Jared Walker. Pursuant to Astrue v. Ratliff, 560 U.S. 586, 598, 130 S.Ct. 2521, 177 L.Ed.2d 91 (2010), the ability to honor the assignment 27 will depend on whether the fees are subject to any offset allowed under the United States Department 28 Westfall v. Saul Stipulation and Order E.D. Cal. 2:19-cv-00957-DB 1 of the Treasury’s Offset Program. After the order for EAJA fees is entered, the government will 2 determine whether they are subject to any offset. 3 4 Fees 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 Jared Walker, pursuant to the assignment executed by Plaintiff. Any 5 payments made shall be delivered to Jared Walker. 6 This stipulation constitutes a compromise settlement of Plaintiff’s request for EAJA attorney 7 fees, and does not constitute an admission of liability on the part of Defendant under the EAJA or 8 otherwise. Payment of the agreed amount shall constitute a complete release from, and bar to, any 9 and all claims that Plaintiff and/or Jared Walker, including his firm, may have relating to EAJA 10 11 12 attorney fees in connection with this action. This award is without prejudice to the rights of Jared Walker to seek Social Security Act attorney fees under 42 U.S.C. § 406(b), subject to the savings clause provisions of the EAJA . 13 14 15 Respectfully submitted, Dated: December 29. 2020 16 By: 17 18 /s/ Jared Walker* JARED WALKER * By email authorization on 12/28/20 Attorney for Plaintiff 19 20 Dated: December 29, 2020 McGREGOR W. SCOTT United States Attorney 21 By: 22 23 /s/ Marcelo Illarmo MARCELO ILLARMO Special Assistant United States Attorney 24 25 26 27 28 Westfall v. Saul Stipulation and Order E.D. Cal. 2:19-cv-00957-DB ORDER 1 2 3 4 Pursuant to the parties’ stipulation, IT IS SO ORDERED. It is also ordered that the December 15, 2020 motion for attorney’s fees (ECF No. 19) is denied as having been rendered moot. DATED: FEBRUARY 12, 2021 5 /s/ DEBORAH BARNES UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 Westfall v. Saul Stipulation and Order E.D. Cal. 2:19-cv-00957-DB

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?