Rizo v. Astrue

Filing 24

STIPULATION AND ORDER FOR THE AWARD OF EQUAL ACCESS TO JUSTICE FEES. Signed by Judge Richard Seeborg on 11/5/13. (cl, COURT STAFF) (Filed on 11/5/2013)

Download PDF
Case3:12-cv-04520-RS Document23 Filed10/25/13 Page1 of 3 1 HARVEY P. SACKETT 2 3 4 5 6 1055 Lincoln Avenue Post Office Box 5025 San Jose, California 95150-5025 Telephone: (408) 295-7755 Facsimile: (408) 295-7444 7 /ms 8 Attorney for Plaintiff 9 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 10 NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA 11 12 MARITZA RIZO, 13 Plaintiff, 14 15 16 17 v. CAROLYN W. COLVIN,1 Acting Commissioner, Social Security Administration, Defendant. 18 19 20 ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) No.: 3:12-CV-04520-RS STIPULATION AND [PROPOSED] ORDER FOR THE AWARD OF EQUAL ACCESS TO JUSTICE FEES The parties hereby stipulate through counsel that, subject to the Court’s approval, 21 Plaintiff shall be awarded attorney fees under the Equal Access to Justice Act (EAJA), 22 28 U.S.C. 2412(d), in the amount of FIVE THOUSAND AND FIVE HUNDRED 23 DOLLARS ($5,500.). This amount represents compensation for all legal services rendered 24 25 26 27 28 1 Carolyn W. Colvin became the Acting Commissioner of Social Security on February 14, 2013. Pursuant to Rule 25(d)(1) of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure, Carolyn W. Colvin should be substituted for Commissioner Michael J. Astrue as 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). For simplicity, Plaintiff will refer to the Acting Commissioner as the Commissioner. 1 STIPULATION AND ORDER Case3:12-cv-04520-RS Document23 Filed10/25/13 Page2 of 3 1 to Plaintiff by counsel in connection with this civil action, and is awarded in accordance with 2 28 U.S.C. § 2412(d). After the Court issues an order for EAJA fees, expenses and costs to 3 Plaintiff, the government will consider the matter of Plaintiff's assignment of EAJA fees and 4 expenses and costs to Plaintiff's attorney. Pursuant to Astrue v. Ratliff, 130 S. Ct. 2521 5 (2010), the ability to honor the assignment will depend on whether the fees, expenses and 6 costs are subject to any offset allowed under the United States Department of the Treasury's 7 Offset Program. After the order for EAJA fees, expenses and costs is entered, the 8 government will determine whether they are subject to any offset. 9 Fees, expenses and costs shall be made payable to Plaintiff, but if the Department of 10 the Treasury determines that Plaintiff does not owe a federal debt, then the government shall 11 cause the payment of fees, expenses and costs to be made directly to Harvey P. Sackett, 12 pursuant to the assignment executed by Plaintiff. Any payments made shall be delivered to 13 Plaintiff's counsel. 14 This stipulation constitutes a compromise settlement of Plaintiff's request for EAJA 15 attorney fees, expenses and costs, and does not constitute an admission of liability on the part 16 of Defendant under the EAJA. Payment of the agreed amount shall constitute a complete 17 release from, and bar to, any and all claims that Plaintiff and/or Plaintiff's counsel may have 18 relating to EAJA attorney fees and expenses and costs in connection with this action. 19 20 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 provisions of the EAJA. 21 22 /s/ Dated: October 25, 2013 HARVEY P. SACKETT Attorney for Plaintiff MARITZA RIZO 23 24 25 /// 26 /// 27 /// 28 /// 2 STIPULATION AND ORDER Case3:12-cv-04520-RS Document23 Filed10/25/13 Page3 of 3 1 MELINDA L. HAAG United States Attorney 2 3 4 /s/ Dated: October 25, 2013 ANNABELLE YANG Special Assistant United States Attorney Attorney for Defendant (as authorized via e-mail) 5 6 7 8 IT IS SO ORDERED. 9 Dated: 11/5/13 /s/ RICHARD SEEBORG United States District Court Judge 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 3 STIPULATION AND ORDER

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?