(SS) Arias v. Commissioner of Social Security ( 2020 )

WQot 42.140 UV VOI GIL INGIN PYVUULITIOCIIL OW Vrocvicy rPayet +viv 1 |) HARVEY P. SACKETT (72488) 2 AND ASSOCIATES 3 A PROFESSIONAL LAW CORP. 4 1055 Lincoln Avenue San Jose, California 95125-6011 5 Telephone: (408) 295-7755 Facsimile: (408) 295-7444 6 Attorney for Plaintiff 7 I Jas 8 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 9 EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA 10 11 || FRANK D. ARIAS, ) Case No.: 2:18-cv-02791-KJN 12 ) Plaintiff, ) STIPULATION AND ORDER FOR 13 THE AWARD AND PAYMENT OF v. ) ATTORNEY FEES PURSUANT TO 14 ) THE EQUAL ACCESS TO JUSTICE ANDREW SAUL, ) ACT, 28 U.S.C. § 2412(d) 15 . . Commissioner of Social Security, ) 16 ) Defendant. 17 ) 18 19 On September 20, 2019 this Court issued an order reversing the final decision of the 29 || Defendant, Andrew Saul, the Commissioner of Social Security (Commissioner), with a remand 21 || for a rehearing, 42 U.S.C. § 405(g) (sentence four); judgment was entered. 2 In the interest of administrative and judicial economy, the parties have agreed to stipulate 23 || that an award of THREE THOUSAND ($3,000.00) in attorney fees under the Equal Access to 94 || Justice Act (EAJA), 28 U.S.C. § 2412(d), is reasonable. This award is without prejudice to 25 || Plaintiffs right to seek attorney’s fees under section 206(b) of the Social Security Act, 42 U.S.C. 26 || $ 406(b), subject to the offset provisions of the EAJA. However, this award shall constitute a 27 28 STIPULATION AND ORDER FOR THE AWARD AND PAYMENT OF ATTORNEY FEES PURSUANT TO THE EQUAL ACCESS TO JUSTICE ACT, 28 U.S.C. § 2412(d) 2 Further, such award shall not be used as precedent in any future cases, nor be construed as a 3 concession by the Commissioner that the original administrative decision denying benefits to 4 Plaintiff was not substantially justified. 5 Under Astrue v. Ratliff, 560 U.S. 586 (2010), EAJA fees awarded by this Court belong to 6 the Plaintiff and are subject to offset under the Treasury Offset Program (31 U.S.C. § 7 3716(c)(3)(B) (2006)). This Court should therefore order the EAJA fees to be paid to Plaintiff. 8 The Commissioner recognizes that Plaintiff assigned his right to EAJA fees to his attorney. If, 9 after receiving the Court’s EAJA fee order, the Commissioner (1) determines that Plaintiff owes 10 no debt subject to offset under the Treasury Offset Program; and (2) agrees to waive the 11 requirements of the Anti-Assignment Act, then the EAJA fees will be made payable to Plaintiff’s 12 attorney. However, if there is a debt owed under the Treasury Offset Program, the 13 Commissioner does not waive the requirements of the Anti-Assignment Act, and the remaining 14 EAJA fees after offset will be paid by a check made out to Plaintiff but delivered to Plaintiff’s 15 attorney. 16 Accordingly, Defendant agrees to pay Plaintiff $3,000.00 in attorney’s fees. 17 All parties whose signature lines appear in this document have consented to its filing. 18 This award is without prejudice to the rights of Sackett and Associates and/or Harvey P. Sackett 19 to seek Social Security Act attorney fees under 42 U.S.C. § 406(b), subject to the savings clause 20 provisions of the EAJA. 21 22 Dated: Dece 23 mber 9, 2019 SACKETT AND ASSOCIATES 24 By: /s/ HARVEY P. SACKETT 25 HARVEY P. SACKETT Attorney for Plaintiff 26 FRANK D. ARIAS 27 28 2 WQot 42.140 UV VOI GIL INGIN PYVUULITIOCIIL OW Vrocvicy rayet vviiv 1 Dated: June 25, 2020 McGREGOR W. SCOTT 2 United States Attorney 3 By: /s/SHARON LAHEY SHARON LAHEY 4 Special Assistant United States Attorney 5 Attorneys for Defendant [*As authorized by email on 12/9/19] 6 4 ORDER 8 || Pursuant to the stipulation, IT IS SO ORDERED. 9 Dated: June 25, 2020 10 AO 11 KENDALL J. NE UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE 12 /2791.arias 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 STIPULATION AND ORDER FOR THE AWARD AND PAYMENT OF ATTORNEY FEES PURSUANT TO THE EQUAL ACCESS TO JUSTICE ACT, 28 U.S.C. § 2412(d)