Marr v. Colvin et al

Filing 23

ORDER approving 22 Stipulation Re: Plaintiffs Application for an Award of Attorney's Fees Under the Equal Access to Justice Act, 28 U.S.C. § 2412. By Judge Robert E. Blackburn on 11/25/2014.(alowe)

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
FOR THE DISTRICT OF COLORADO
Judge Robert E. Blackburn
Civil Action No. 13-CV-01216-REB
KENDALL B. MARR,
Plaintiff,
v.
CAROLYN W. COLVIN, Acting Commissioner of Social Security,
Defendant.

ORDER
Blackburn, J.
The matter is before the court on the Stipulation Re: Plaintiffs Application For
an Award of Attorney’s Fees Under The Equal Access to Justice Act, 28 U.S.C. §
2412 [#22]1 filed November 25, 2014. After reviewing the stipulation and the record, I
conclude that the stipulation should be approved and that plaintiff should be awarded
$4,008.07 in attorney fees pursuant to the EAJA.
THEREFORE, IT IS ORDERED as follows:
1. That the Stipulation Re: Plaintiffs Application For an Award of Attorney’s
Fees Under The Equal Access to Justice Act, 28 U.S.C. § 2412 [#22] filed November
25, 2014, is APPROVED;
2. That pursuant to the EAJA, plaintiff is awarded attorney fees of $4,008.07;
3. That payment of attorney fees SHALL constitute a complete release from

1

“[#22]” is an example of the convention I use to identify the docket number assigned to a specific
paper by the court’s case management and electronic case filing system (CM/ECF). I use this convention
throughout this order.

and bar to any and all claims plaintiff may have relating to EAJA fees related to this
action;
4. That this award SHALL not be used as precedent in any future cases, nor be
construed as a concession by the Commissioner that the original administrative
decision denying benefits to plaintiff or the Commissioner’s litigation position was not
substantially justified;
5. That the EAJA award is without prejudice to plaintiff’s attorney’s right to seek
attorney fees pursuant to Social Security Act § 206(b), 42 U.S.C. § 406(b), subject to
the offset provisions of the EAJA, see 28 U.S.C. § 2412(c)(1)(2006);
6. That after receiving the court’s EAJA fee order, the Commissioner (1)
determines upon effectuation of the court’s EAJA fee order that plaintiff does not owe a
debt that is subject to offset under the Treasury Offset Program, and (2) agrees to waive
the requirements of the Anti-Assignment Act, the fees will be made payable to plaintiff’s
attorney;
7. That if there is a debt owned under the Treasury Offset Program, the
Commissioner cannot agree to waive the requirements of the Anti-Assignment Act; and
8. That the remaining EAJA fees after offset will be paid by a check made out to
plaintiff but delivered to plaintiff’s attorney.
Dated November 25, 2014, at Denver, Colorado.
BY THE COURT:

2