Keyser v. Commissioner of Social Security

Filing 26

ORDER - Plaintiff's application for attorneys fees (Dkt. 23 ), is GRANTED. Signed on 6/12/2015 by Judge Michael H. Simon. (mja)

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
FOR THE DISTRICT OF OREGON

PAMELA KEYSER,
Plaintiff,

Case No. 6:13-cv-2031-SB
ORDER

v.
CAROLYN W. COLVIN,
Commissioner of Social Security,
Defendant.

Michael H. Simon, District Judge.

On March 23, 2015, the Court reversed the Commissioner’s determination that Plaintiff
was not disabled and remanded the matter back to the agency for further proceedings. Dkt. 21.
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. 23.
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
PAGE 1 – ORDER

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
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 $9,035.83. Defendant does
not challenge the applicability of the EAJA statute and does not object to Plaintiff’s request for
attorney’s fees. Dkt. 24. 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. 23), is GRANTED. Plaintiff is
awarded $9,035.83 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.
Accordingly, Defendant shall mail to Plaintiff’s attorney the awarded EAJA fees, expenses, and
costs, after deducting any applicable offset. Because Plaintiff’s attorney has attested to the fact
that Plaintiff executed an assignment of EAJA fees to her counsel (Dkt. 23), 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

PAGE 2 – ORDER

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 12th day of June, 2015.

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

PAGE 3 – ORDER