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)

Download PDF
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: 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?