United States District Court for the Eastern District of California, 2022

(SS) Hudson v. Commissioner of Social Security

(SS) Hudson v. Commissioner of Social Security
United States District Court for the Eastern District of California · Decided June 13, 2022
(SS) Hudson v. Commissioner of Social Security

Trial Court Opinion

PHILLIP A. TALBERT United States Attorney PETER K. THOMPSON, HIBN 5890 Acting Regional Chief Counsel, Region IX Social Security Administration MARGARET BRANICK-ABILLA Special Assistant United States Attorney 5 160 Spear Street, Suite 800 San Francisco, CA 94105-1545 6 Telephone: (510) 970-4809 Facsimile: (415) 744-0134 E-mail: [email protected] Attorneys for Defendant 10 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA 11 SACRAMENTO DIVISION ROSEZETTA VIVIAN HUDSON, ) Case No. 2:19-cv-02390-JAM-JDP 13 ) Plaintiff, ) STIPULATION AND [PROPOSED] ) ORDER FOR THE AWARD AND 15 vs. ) PAYMENT OF ATTORNEY FEES ) PURSUANT TO THE EQUAL ACCESS KILOLO KIJAKAZI, Acting ) TO JUSTICE ACT, 28 U.S.C. § 2412(d) Commissioner of Social Security, ) ) 18 Defendant. ) ) 19 ) 21 IT IS HEREBY STIPULATED by and between the parties, through their undersigned counsel, subject to the approval of the Court, that Plaintiff be awarded attorney fees in the amount of SEVEN THOUSAND, SIX HUNDRED AND THIRTY-FIVE DOLLARS AND ZERO CENTS ($7,635.00) under the Equal Access to Justice Act (EAJA), 28 U.S.C. § 2412(d). This amount represents compensation for all legal services rendered on behalf of Plaintiff by counsel in connection with this civil action, in accordance with 28 U.S.C. §§ 1920, 2412(d).

27 After the Court issues an order for EAJA fees to Plaintiff, the government will consider the matter of Plaintiff’s assignment of EAJA fees to counsel Eddy Pierre Pierre (Counsel). Pursuant to Astrue v. Ratliff, 560 U.S. 586, 598 (2010), the ability to honor the assignment will depend on whether the fees are subject to any offset allowed under the United States Department of the Treasury’s Offset Program. After the order for EAJA fees is entered, the government will determine whether they are subject to any offset.

5 Fees shall be made payable to Plaintiff, but if the Department of the Treasury determines that Plaintiff does not owe a federal debt, then the government shall cause the payment of fees to be made directly to Counsel, pursuant to the assignment executed by Plaintiff. Any payments made shall be delivered to Counsel.

9 This stipulation constitutes a compromise settlement of Plaintiff’s request for EAJA attorney fees, and does not constitute an admission of liability on the part of Defendant under the EAJA or otherwise. Payment of the agreed amount shall constitute a complete release from, and bar to, any and all claims that Plaintiff and/or Counsel, including Omar Ortega and Pierre Pierre Law, P.C., may have relating to EAJA attorney fees in connection with this action.

14 This award is without prejudice to the rights of counsel to seek Social Security Act attorney fees under 42 U.S.C. § 406(b), subject to the savings clause provisions of the EAJA.

16 Respectfully submitted, Dated: June 8, 2022 PIERRE PIERRE LAW, P.C.

By: /s/ Omar Ortega * 19 OMAR ORTEGA Attorneys for Plaintiff [*As authorized by e-mail on Jun. 8, 2022] Dated: June 11, 2022 PHILLIP A. TALBERT 23 United States Attorney PETER K. THOMPSON 24 Acting Regional Chief Counsel, Region IX Social Security Administration 26 By: /s/ Margaret Branick-Abilla ___ MARGARET BRANICK-ABILLA 27 Special Assistant United States Attorney Attorneys for Defendant ee EI NEE III NN IIE IIE IGE OE IED IEE EE PROPOSED} ORDER IT IS SO ORDERED.

Dated: _ June 11, 2022 5 awe D. PE ERSON UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE ; Stinnlation: PPrepeced! Order

Case-law data current through December 31, 2025. Source: CourtListener bulk data.