1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 9 SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA 10 11 MELANIE ANNE D., Case No.: 23-cv-1698-DDL

12 Plaintiff, ORDER GRANTING JOINT 13 v. MOTION FOR AWARD OF ATTORNEY’S FEES UNDER 14 MARTIN O’MALLEY, THE EQUAL ACCESS TO 15 Commissioner of Social Security,1 JUSTICE ACT

16 Defendant. [Dkt. No. 11] 17

18 On September 14, 2023, Melanie Anne D. (“Plaintiff”) commenced an action 19 against the Commissioner of Social Security, seeking review of a final adverse 20 decision of the Commissioner. Dkt. No. 1. On October 24, 2023, on the parties’ 21 joint motion, the Court issued an Order reversing the Commissioner’s decision and 22 remanding the case for further administrative proceedings. Dkt. No. 9. 23 Before the Court is the parties’ Joint Motion for the Award and Payment of 24 Attorney’s Fees and Expenses Pursuant to the Equal Access to Justice Act (the 25 “Joint Motion”). Dkt. No. 11. 26 27 1 Pursuant to Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 25(d), Commissioner O’Malley 28 1 The Equal Access to Justice Act (“EAJA”) provides, in relevant part, that “a 2 court shall award to a prevailing party other than the United States fees and other 3 expenses, in addition to any costs awarded pursuant to subsection (a), incurred by 4 that party in any civil action . . ., including proceedings for judicial review of agency 5 action, brought by or against the United States, unless the court finds that the 6 position of the United States was substantially justified or that special 7 circumstances make an award unjust.” See

(d)(1)(A). Based 8 on the parties’ agreement and on the record before it, the Court finds the award of 9 fees in the requested amount is appropriate here. 10 Therefore, IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that Plaintiff MELANIE ANNE D. is 11 awarded attorney’s fees and expenses in the amount of eight hundred ninety-eight 12 dollars and 28/100 ($ 898.28) under EAJA (

(d)), and costs 13 in the amount of zero dollars ($0.00) under

. This amount 14 represents compensation for all legal services rendered by counsel on Plaintiff’s 15 behalf in connection with this civil action. 16 Following the issuance of this Order, the government will consider the matter 17 of Plaintiff’s assignment of EAJA fees to her counsel. The ability to honor the 18 assignment will depend on whether the fees are subject to any offset allowed under 19 the United States Department of the Treasury’s Offset Program. See Astrue v. 20 Ratliff,

(2010). Upon entry of this Order, the government will 21 determine whether they are subject to any offset. 22 Fees shall be made payable to Plaintiff, but if the Department of the Treasury 23 determines that Plaintiff does not owe a federal debt, then the government shall 24 cause the payment of fees, expenses and costs to be made directly to Plaintiff’s 25 counsel, Jonathan O. Peña, pursuant to the assignment executed by Plaintiff. Any 26 payments made shall be delivered Plaintiff’s counsel. Additionally, any payment 27 of costs under

may be made either by electronic fund transfer 28 (ETF) or by check. 1 Pursuant to the parties’ agreement, payment of the agreed amount 2 ||constitutes a compromise settlement of Plaintiff's request for EAJA attorney’s fees, 3 ||and does not constitute an admission of liability on the part of Defendant under the 4 ||EAJA or otherwise. Payment of the agreed amount shall constitute a complete 5 ||release from, and bar to, any and all claims that Plaintiff and/or her counsel 6 || (including counsel's firm) may have relating to EAJA attorney's fees in connection 7 || with this action. 8 This award is without prejudice to the rights of Plaintiff's counsel and/or 9 || counsel's firm to seek Social Security Act attorney's fees under

(b), 10 ||subject to the savings clause provisions of the EAJA. 11 || 1S SO ORDERED. 12 || Dated: January 26, 2024 ait Ste bbe 4 □□□□□□□□□□□□□□□□□□□□□□□□□□ 15 United States Magistrate Judge 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28