United States District Court for the Eastern District of California, 2024

(SS) Pratt v. Commissioner of Social Security

(SS) Pratt v. Commissioner of Social Security
United States District Court for the Eastern District of California · Decided January 3, 2024
(SS) Pratt v. Commissioner of Social Security

Trial Court Opinion

FORSLUND LAW, LLC Jacqueline A. Forslund # 154575 P.O. Box 4476 Sunriver, OR 97707 Telephone: 541-419-0074 Fax: 541-593-4452 Email: [email protected] Attorney for Plaintiff UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA DANIEL JOSEPH PRATT, ) No. 2:22-cv-2152 DB 9 ) Plaintiff ) STIPULATION AND ) ORDER FOR AWARD OF ATTORNEY’S v. ) FEES UNDER THE EQUAL ACCESS TO ) JUSTICE ACT (EAJA) KILOLO KIJAKAZI, ) Acting Commissioner of Social Security, ) ) 14 Defendant ) ) ____________________________________) IT IS HEREBY STIPULATED by and between the parties through their undersigned counsel, subject to the approval of the Court, that Plaintiff shall be awarded attorney’s fees under the Equal Access to Justice Act (EAJA), 28 U.S.C. sec. 2412(d), in the amount of FIFTEEN THOUSAND dollars and ZERO cents ($15,000.00). 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. sec. 2412(d).

After the Court issues an order for payment of EAJA fees and expenses to Plaintiff, the government will consider the matter of Plaintiff’s assignment of EAJA fees and expenses to Plaintiff’s attorney. The government’s ability to honor the assignment will depend on whether the fees and expenses are subject to an offset allowed under the United States Department of the Treasury’s Offset Program pursuant to Astrue v. Ratliff, 130 S.Ct. 2521 (2010). After the order of EAJA fees and expenses is entered, the government will determine if they are subject to an offset. If it is determined that Plaintiff’s EAJA fees and expenses are not subject to an offset under Astrue v. Ratcliff, 130 S.Ct. 2521 (2010) and the Department of Treasury’s Offset Program, then the check for EAJA fees and expenses shall be made payable to Jacqueline A. Forslund, based upon Plaintiff’s assignment of these amounts to Plaintiff’s attorney. The parties agree that whether these checks are made payable to Plaintiff or Jacqueline A. Forslund, such checks shall be mailed to Plaintiff’s attorney. 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 Plaintiff’s Counsel may have relating to EAJA attorney fees in connection with this action.

9 Respectfully submitted, Date: December 21, 2023 JACQUELINE A. FORSLUND Attorney at Law /s/Jacqueline A. Forslund 13 JACQUELINE A. FORSLUND Attorney for Plaintiff Date: December 22, 2023 PHILLIP A. TALBERT United States Attorney 17 /s/Michelle A. Pavelek MICHELLE A. PAVELEK Special Assistant United States Attorney 19 *By email authorization Attorney for Defendant ORDER 22 APPROVED AND SO ORDERED.

DATED: January 2, 2024 /s/ DEBORAH BARNES UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE

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