Padilla v. Colvin

Filing 32

ORDER; 31 Stipulation for Equal Access to Justice Act Attorney Fees is GRANTED. IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that Defendant shall pay Plaintiff $4,500.00 in attorneys fees under the EAJA, by Magistrate Judge Kristen L. Mix on 11/12/15.(morti, )

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
FOR THE DISTRICT OF COLORADO
Civil Action No. 14-cv-02602-KLM
MICHELE G. PADILLA,
Plaintiff,
v.
CAROLYN W. COLVIN, Acting Commissioner of Social Security,
Defendant.
______________________________________________________________________
ORDER
______________________________________________________________________
ENTERED BY MAGISTRATE JUDGE KRISTEN L. MIX
This matter is before the Court1 on the parties’ Stipulation for Equal Access to
Justice Act Attorney Fees [#31],2 (the “Motion”). In the Motion, the parties agree that
Plaintiff should be awarded $4,500.00 in attorneys’ fees pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 2412, the
Equal Access to Justice Act (“EAJA”). Motion [#31] at 1. Under the EAJA, a party who
prevails against the United States in court, including a successful Social Security benefits
claimant, may be awarded fees if the position of the United States was not “substantially
justified” and there are no special circumstances that make an award of fees unjust. 28
U.S.C. § 2412(d)(1)(A); Gisbrecht v. Barnhart, 535 U.S. 789, 796 (2002). Where, as here,
a Social Security disability claimant obtains a remand to the Commissioner under 42 U.S.C.

1

The parties consented to proceed before the undersigned for all proceedings pursuant
to 28 U.S.C. § 636(c) and D.C.COLO.LCivR 72.2. See generally Consent Form [#27].
2

“[#31]” is an example of the convention the Court uses to identify the docket number
assigned to a specific paper by the Court’s case management and electronic case filing system
(CM/ECF). This convention is used throughout this Order.

-1-

§ 405(g), she is a prevailing party for purposes of the EAJA. See Shalala v. Schaefer, 509
U.S. 292, 302 (1993).
Having reviewed the hours and hourly rate of Plaintiff’s attorney, Teresa H. Abbott,
see [#31-2], and given the parties’ agreement to an award of $4,500.00, the Court finds this
amount to be reasonable. Accordingly,
IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that the Motion [#31] is GRANTED. Accordingly,
IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that Defendant shall pay Plaintiff $4,500.00 in attorneys’
fees under the EAJA.
IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that if, after receiving this Order, the Commissioner (1)
determines that Plaintiff has assigned the EAJA fees to his attorney, (2) determines upon
effectuation of this Order that Plaintiff does not owe a debt which is subject to offset under
the Treasury Offset Program, and (3) agrees to waive the requirements of the
Anti-Assignment Act, the fees will be made payable to Plaintiff’s attorney. However, 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 the remaining EAJA fees after
offset will be paid by a check made out to Plaintiff but delivered to Plaintiff’s attorney.

Dated: November 12, 2015

-2-