Saladino v. Commissioner of Social Security
Filing
23
ORDER granting 21 Plaintiff's Motion for Attorney Fees. See written order. Entered by Magistrate Judge Jonathan E. Hawley on 03/09/2017. (RT, ilcd)
E-FILED
Thursday, 09 March, 2017 10:05:33 AM
Clerk, U.S. District Court, ILCD
IN THE
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
CENTRAL DISTRICT OF ILLINOIS
PEORIA DIVISION
HEATHER A. SALADINO,
Plaintiff,
v.
Case No. 1:16-cv-01165-JEH
NANCY A. BERRYHILL, ACTING
COMMISSIONER OF SOCIAL
SECURITY ADMINISTRATION,
Defendant.
Order
The Court has reviewed the Plaintiff’s Motion for EAJA Fees Pursuant to 28
U.S.C. § 2412. (D. 21). 1 The Defendant has no objection. (D. 22). The Court
therefore GRANTS the Motion and awards the Plaintiff, Heather Saladino,
$3,325.00 (three thousand three hundred twenty five dollars) for attorney fees and
$0 (zero dollars) for costs in full satisfaction of any and all claims the Plaintiff may
have under the Equal Access to Justice Act, 28 U.S.C. § 2412. 2 The award fully and
completely satisfies any and all claims for attorney fees, expenses, and costs that
may be payable to the Plaintiff in this matter under the EAJA.
Any fees paid belong to the Plaintiff and not the Plaintiff’s attorney. The
fees can be offset to satisfy any pre-existing debt that the Plaintiff owes the United
States. Astrue v. Ratliff, 560 U.S. 586, 589 (2010). If the Defendant can verify that
the Plaintiff does not owe pre-existing debt to the government subject to offset, the
Defendant will direct payment of the award to the Plaintiff’s attorney pursuant to
1Citations
2
to the Docket in this case are abbreviated as “D. __.”
The undersigned presides over this case with the consent of all parties. (D. 13).
1
a valid EAJA assignment that has been executed between the Plaintiff and the
Plaintiff’s attorney.
It is so ordered.
Entered on March 9, 2017.
s/Jonathan E. Hawley
U.S. MAGISTRATE JUDGE
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?