Pope v. Astrue

Filing 26

ORDER by Judge Richard A Jones. The court GRANTS Plaintiff's motion for attorney fees (Dkt. # 22 ), but reduces fees slightly in accordance with the parties' agreement that the initial motion contains a minor calculation error. (CL)

Download PDF
HONORABLE RICHARD A. JONES 1 2 3 4 5 6 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT WESTERN DISTRICT OF WASHINGTON AT SEATTLE 7 8 9 MIRANDA L. POPE, Plaintiff, 10 11 12 13 CASE NO. C12-2157RAJ v. CAROLYN W. COLVIN, in her capacity as Acting Commissioner 1of the Social Security Administration, ORDER Defendant. 14 15 The court GRANTS Plaintiff’s motion for attorney fees (Dkt. # 22), but reduces 16 fees slightly in accordance with the parties’ agreement that the initial motion contains a 17 minor calculation error. The court awards Plaintiff attorney fees of $5,164.66 and 18 reimbursement of expenses in the amount of $24.83 for a total of $5,189.49 pursuant to 19 the Equal Access to Justice Act, 28 U.S.C. § 2412, subject to any offset as described in 20 Astrue v. Ratliff, 130 S.Ct. 2521 (2010). Plaintiff is also awarded $13.10 in costs under 21 28 U.S.C. § 1920. The check(s) shall be mailed to Plaintiff’s attorney’s office: 22 23 Law Office of Steven M. Robey 1414 F Street Bellingham, WA 98225 24 If it is determined that Plaintiff’s EAJA fees are not subject to any offset allowed 25 under the Department of the Treasury’s Offset Program, the check for EAJA fees shall be 26 1 27 28 In accordance with Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 25(d), the court substitutes Ms. Colvin for her predecessor, Michael J. Astrue. ORDER – 1 1 made payable to the Law Office of Steven M. Robey, based upon Plaintiff’s assignment 2 of these amounts to Plaintiff’s attorney. 3 DATED this 29th day of October, 2013. 4 A 5 6 The Honorable Richard A. Jones United States District Court Judge 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 ORDER – 2

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?