Loew v. Commissioner, Social Security Administration

Filing 29

ORDER - Plaintiff's application for attorney's fees (Dkt. 26 ) is GRANTED. Plaintiff is awarded $4,773.36 for attorney's fees under 28 U.S.C. § 2412. EAJA fees are subject to any offsets allowed under the Treasury Of fset Program, as discussed in Ratliff, 560 U.S. at 593-94. Because Plaintiff has filed with the Court an assignment of EAJA fees to his counsel (Dkt. 27 -1), if Plaintiff has no debt subject to the Treasury Offset Program, then Defendant shall cause the check to be made payable to Plaintiff's attorney and mailed to Plaintiffs attorney. If Plaintiff owes a debt subject to the Treasury Offset Program, then the check for any remaining funds after offset of the debt shall be payable to Plaintiff and mailed to Plaintiff's attorney. Signed 8/25/2014 by Judge Michael H. Simon. (mja)

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
FOR THE DISTRICT OF OREGON

SCOTT S. LOEW,
Plaintiff,

Case No. 6:13-cv-0446-SI
ORDER

v.
CAROLYN W. COLVIN,
Acting Commissioner of Social Security,
Defendant.
Michael H. Simon, District Judge.
On May 9, 2014, the Court reversed the Commissioner’s determination that Plaintiff was
not disabled and remanded the matter back to the agency for a finding of disability. Dkt. 24.
Before the Court is Plaintiff’s application for attorney’s fees pursuant to the Equal Access to
Justice Act (“EAJA”), 28 U.S.C. § 2412. Dkt. 26.
The EAJA authorizes the payment of attorney’s fees to a prevailing party in an action
against the United States, unless the government shows that its position in the underlying
litigation “was substantially justified.” 28 U.S.C. § 2412(d)(1)(A). Although the EAJA creates a
presumption that fees will be awarded to a prevailing party, Congress did not intend fee shifting
to be mandatory. Flores v. Shalala, 49 F.3d 562, 567 (9th Cir. 1995). The decision to deny EAJA
PAGE 1 –ORDER

attorney’s fees is within the discretion of the court. Id.; Lewis v. Barnhart, 281 F.3d 1081, 1083
(9th Cir. 2002). A social security claimant is the “prevailing party” following a sentence-four
remand pursuant to 42 U.S.C. § 405(g) either for further administrative proceedings or for the
payment of benefits. Flores, 49 F.3d at 567-68 (citing Shalala v. Schaefer, 509 U.S. 292, 300
(1993)). Fee awards under the EAJA are paid to the litigant, and not the litigant’s attorney,
unless the litigant has assigned his or her rights to counsel to receive the fee award. Astrue v.
Ratliff, 560 U.S. 586, 596-98 (2010).
Plaintiff seeks an award of attorney’s fees in the amount of $4,773.36. Defendant
stipulates to this fee award. Dkt. 26. The Court has reviewed Plaintiff’s motion and agrees with
the parties that the EAJA petition is proper and the amount requested is reasonable.
Therefore, Plaintiff’s application for attorney’s fees (Dkt. 26) is GRANTED. Plaintiff is
awarded $4,773.36 for attorney’s fees under 28 U.S.C. § 2412. EAJA fees are subject to any
offsets allowed under the Treasury Offset Program, as discussed in Ratliff, 560 U.S. at 593-94.
Because Plaintiff has filed with the Court an assignment of EAJA fees to his counsel (Dkt. 27-1),
if Plaintiff has no debt subject to the Treasury Offset Program, then Defendant shall cause the
check to be made payable to Plaintiff’s attorney and mailed to Plaintiff’s attorney. If Plaintiff
owes a debt subject to the Treasury Offset Program, then the check for any remaining funds after
offset of the debt shall be payable to Plaintiff and mailed to Plaintiff’s attorney.
IT IS SO ORDERED.
DATED this 25th day of August, 2014.

/s/ Michael H. Simon
Michael H. Simon
United States District Judge

PAGE 2 –ORDER