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)
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?