Forsythe v. Astrue
Filing
19
STIPULATION AND ORDER. Signed by Magistrate Judge Maria-Elena James on 2/26/2013. (rmm2S, COURT STAFF) (Filed on 2/26/2013)
1
2
3
4
MELINDA L. HAAG CSBN 132612
United States Attorney
GRACE M. KIM SBN IL 6203390
Regional Chief Counsel, Region IX
ELIZABETH BARRY, CSBN 203314
Special Assistant United States Attorney
160 Spear Street, Suite 800
San Francisco, California 94105
Telephone: (415) 977-8972
Facsimile: (415) 744-0134
Email: Elizabeth.Barry@ssa.gov
5
6
7
8
Attorneys for Defendant
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA
SAN FRANCISCO DIVISION
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
MICHAEL JOHN FORSYTHE,
)
)
Plaintiff,
)
)
v.
)
)
)
MICHAEL ASTRUE,
)
Commissioner of Social Security,
)
)
Defendant.
)
___________________________________)
20
21
22
23
24
subject to the approval of the Court, that Michael John Forsythe will be awarded attorney fees in the
amount of four-thousand, six-hundred dollars ($4,600.00) under the Equal Access to Justice Act
(EAJA), 28 U.S.C. § 2412(d) and three-hundred and fifty dollars ($350.00) in costs under Taxation of
Costs, 28 U.S.C. § 1920.1 This amount represents compensation for all legal services rendered on behalf
of Plaintiff by counsel in connection with this civil action, in accordance with 28 U.S.C. §§ 2412(d),
1920.
After the Court issues an order for EAJA fees to Michael John Forsythe, Defendant will consider
25
26
27
28
STIPULATION FOR THE AWARD AND
PAYMENT OF ATTORNEY FEES PURSUANT
TO THE EQUAL ACCESS TO JUSTICE ACT,
28 U.S.C. § 2412(d) AND COSTS PURSUANT
TO 28 U.S.C. § 1920
IT IS HEREBY STIPULATED by and between the parties through their undersigned counsel,
18
19
CASE NO.: C-3:12-cv-02093-MEJ
any assignment of EAJA fees to David Joseph Linden. Pursuant to Astrue v. Ratliff, 130 S.Ct. 2521,
1
Carolyn W. Colvin became the Acting Commissioner of Social Security on February 14, 2013.
Pursuant to Rule 25(d) of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure, Carolyn W. Colvin should be substituted
for Michael J. Astrue as the defendant in this suit. No further action need be taken to continue this suit
by reason of the last sentence of section 205(g) of the Social Security Act, 42 U.S.C. § 405(g).
1
2252-2253 (2010), the ability to honor any such assignment will depend on whether the fees are subject
2
to any offset allowed under the United States Department of the Treasury's Offset Program. After the
3
order for EAJA fees is entered, Defendant will determine whether they are subject to any offset.
4
Fees shall be made payable to Michael John Forsythe, but if the Department of the Treasury
5
determines that Michael John Forsythe does not owe a federal debt, then the government shall cause the
6
payment of fees to be made directly to the David Joseph Linden, pursuant to any assignment executed
7
by Plaintiff. Any payments made shall be delivered to David Joseph Linden.
8
9
This stipulation constitutes a compromise settlement of Michael John Forsythe’s request for EAJA
attorney fees and does not constitute an admission of liability on the part of Defendant under the EAJA.
10
Payment of the agreed amount shall constitute a complete release from, and bar to, any and all claims
11
that Michael John Forsythe and/or David Joseph Linden may have relating to EAJA attorney fees in
12
connection with this action. This award is without prejudice to the rights of David Joseph Linden to seek
13
Social Security Act attorney fees under 42 U.S.C. § 406(b), subject to the savings clause provisions of
14
the EAJA.
15
16
Respectfully submitted,
Dated: February 25, 2013
17
18
MELINDA L. HAAG
United States Attorney
19
20
/s/ David Joseph Linden
(as authorized via e-mail)
David Joseph Linden
Attorney for Plaintiff
Dated: February 25, 2013
21
22
By /s/ Elizabeth Barry
ELIZABETH BARRY
Special Assistant U.S. Attorney
Attorneys for Defendant
23
24
ORDER
25
PURSUANT TO STIPULATION, IT IS SO ORDERED.
26
February 25, 2013
DATED:________________________
27
_________________________________
MARIA-ELENA JAMES
UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE
28
2
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?