Kimbrough v. Astrue
ORDER granting 28 Motion for Attorney Fees and ordering that Commr of Soc Sec pay to plf's cnsl the sum of $4,323.00 in full satisfaction of any and all clms arising under EAJA, 28 USC 2412(d). Signed by Magistrate Judge David Keesler on November 16, 2012. (cbb)
IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
FOR THE WESTERN DISTRICT OF NORTH CAROLINA
CIVIL ACTION NO. 5:10-CV-167-RLV-DCK
CHARLES E. KIMBROUGH,
MICHAEL J. ASTRUE,
Commissioner of Social Security,
THIS MATTER IS BEFORE THE COURT on “Plaintiff’s Petition For Attorney Fees
Under § 406(b) Of The Social Security Act” (Document No. 28) filed November 15, 2012. This
motion has been referred to the undersigned Magistrate Judge pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 636(b), and
immediate review is appropriate. Having carefully considered the motion, and noting consent of
Defendant’s counsel, the undersigned will grant the motion.
Pursuant to Comm’r of Soc. Sec. v. Ratliff, 560 U.S. ----, 130 S.Ct. 2521 (2010), the fee
award will first be subject to offset of any debt Plaintiff may owe to the United States. Defendant
will determine within 30 days of this order 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 Plaintiff does not owe a federal debt, the government will exercise its discretion
and honor the assignment of EAJA fees, and pay the awarded fees directly to Plaintiff’s counsel.
IT IS, THEREFORE, ORDERED that “Plaintiff’s Petition For Attorney Fees Under §
406(b) Of The Social Security Act” (Document No. 28) is GRANTED.
IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that the Commissioner of Social Security pay to Plaintiff’s
counsel the sum of $4,323.00 in full satisfaction of any and all claims arising under EAJA, 28
U.S.C. § 2412(d).
Signed: November 16, 2012
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?