Roe v. Colvin

Filing 30

ORDER ADOPTING REPORT AND RECOMMENDATIONS; re Granting Plaintiff's Motion for Attorney's Fees by Judge John C Coughenour. (TM)

Download PDF
THE HONORABLE JOHN C. COUGHENOUR 1 2 3 4 5 6 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT WESTERN DISTRICT OF WASHINGTON AT SEATTLE 7 8 9 CHARLES E. ROE, 10 Plaintiff, 11 12 CASE NO. C13-1744-JCC ORDER v. 13 CAROLYN W. COLVIN, Acting Commissioner of Social Security, 14 Defendant. 15 This matter comes before the Court on the Report and Recommendation of the Honorable 16 Brian A. Tsuchida, United States Magistrate Judge. (Dkt. No. 29.) No objections have been filed. 17 Having thoroughly considered the parties’ briefing, the relevant record, and the Report and 18 Recommendation, the Court hereby ORDERS as follows: 19 (1) The Report and Recommendation is ADOPTED. 20 (2) Attorney’s fees in the total amount of $7,379.40 and expenses in the amount of 21 $15.03 (for postage and service of process fees) pursuant to the Equal Access to Justice Act, 28 22 U.S.C. § 2412(d), shall be awarded to Plaintiff subject to any offset provided for under Astrue v. 23 Ratliff, 560 U.S. 586 (2010). 24 If the U.S. Department of the Treasury determines that Plaintiff’s EAJA fees and 25 expenses are not subject to any offset allowed under the Department of the Treasury’s Offset 26 Program, then the check(s) for EAJA fees and expenses shall be made payable to Plaintiff’s ORDER PAGE - 1 1 attorney, Richard Baum, based upon Plaintiff’s assignment of these amounts to Plaintiff’s 2 attorney. Whether the check is made payable to Plaintiff, or to Richard Baum, the check(s) shall 3 be mailed to Mr. Baum at the following address: 119 N. Commercial St., Ste. 191, Bellingham, 4 WA 98225. 5 DATED this 18th day of August 2014. 6 7 8 A 9 10 11 John C. Coughenour UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 ORDER PAGE - 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?