Marlowe v. Colvin
ORDER granting 18 Motion for Attorney Fees. Signed by Magistrate Judge David Keesler on 9/11/2017. (kby)
IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
FOR THE WESTERN DISTRICT OF NORTH CAROLINA
CIVIL ACTION NO. 1:16-CV-109-MOC-DCK
VIOLET E. MARLOWE,
NANCY A. BERRYHILL ,
Acting Commissioner of Social Security,
THIS MATTER IS BEFORE THE COURT on the “Consent Motion For Fees Pursuant
To The Equal Access To Justice Act 28 U.S.C. §2412(d)(1)(A)” (Document No. 18) filed
September 9, 2017. This case has been referred to the undersigned Magistrate Judge pursuant to
28 U.S.C. §636(b)(1)(B). Having carefully considered the motion and the record, and noting
consent of Defendant’s counsel, the undersigned will grant the motion that Plaintiff should be
awarded an attorney’s fee under the Equal Access to Justice Act (“EAJA”), 28 U.S.C. § 2412(d),
in the amount of $4,480.00.
IT IS, THEREFORE, ORDERED that the “Consent Motion For Fees Pursuant To The
Equal Access To Justice Act 28 U.S.C. §2412(d)(1)(A)” (Document No. 18) is GRANTED, to
the extent that the Court will award attorney fees in the amount of $4,480.00, and that pursuant to
Comm’r of Soc. Sec. v. Ratliff, 130 S. Ct. 2521 (2010), the fee award will first be subject to offset
of any debt Plaintiff may owe to the United States. The Commissioner will determine whether
Plaintiff owes a debt to the United States. If so, the debt will be satisfied first, and if any funds
remain, they will be made payable to Plaintiff and mailed to Plaintiff’s counsel. If the United
States Department of the Treasury reports to the Commissioner that the Plaintiff does not owe a
federal debt, the government will exercise its discretion and honor an assignment of EAJA fees,
and pay the awarded fees directly to Plaintiff’s counsel. No additional petition pursuant to 28
U.S.C. § 2412(d) shall be filed.
Signed: September 11, 2017
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?