Johnson v. Berryhill
Filing
18
ORDER granting 17 Motion for Attorney Fees under EAJA. Signed by District Judge Robert J. Conrad, Jr. on 2/05/2019. (ejb)
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
WESTERN DISTRICT OF NORTH CAROLINA
ASHEVILLE DIVISION
1:17-cv-00034-RJC
BRENDA JOHNSON,
)
)
Plaintiff,
)
)
v.
)
)
NANCY A. BERRYHILL, Acting
)
Commissioner of Social Security,
)
)
Defendant.
)
____________________________________ )
ORDER
THIS MATTER comes before the Court on Plaintiff’s Consent Motion for
Attorney Fees pursuant to the Equal Access to Justice Act (“EAJA”), 28 U.S.C.
§ 2412(d)(1)(A), (Doc. No. 17), and supporting briefs and exhibits. Plaintiff indicates
that Defendant has consented to this Motion, and Defendant has not objected to the
requested fees and the time for doing so has expired. (Id.). Having reviewed the
Motion, supporting exhibits, and the case file, the Court determines that Plaintiff
should be awarded attorney fees under EAJA, 28 U.S.C. § 2412(d), in the amount of
$4,925.00.
IT IS, THEREFORE, ORDERED that Plaintiff’s Motion for Attorney Fees,
(Doc. No. 17), is GRANTED. The Court will award attorney fees in the amount of
$4,925.00, and pursuant to Astrue v. Ratliff, 560 U.S. 586 (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, that 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 any debt, the Government will exercise its discretion and honor an assignment
of EAJA fees, and pay those fees directly to Plaintiff’s counsel. No additional
petition pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 2412(d) shall be filed.
Signed: February 5, 2019
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?