U.S. District Court, District of Minnesota, 2023

Nyberg v. Kijakazi

Nyberg v. Kijakazi
U.S. District Court, District of Minnesota · Decided August 24, 2023

Nyberg v. Kijakazi

Trial Court Opinion

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT DISTRICT OF MINNESOTA Stacy A.N., Case No. 23-cv-323 (DJF) Plaintiff, ORDER GRANTING PLAINTIFF’S v. MOTION FOR ATTORNEY’S FEES Kilolo Kijakazi, Defendant.

This matter is before the Court on Plaintiff’s Motion for Attorney Fees (“Motion”) (ECF No. 17). Plaintiff seeks attorneys’ fees in the amount of $5,103.00 pursuant to the Equal Access to Justice Act, 28 U.S.C. § 2412(d)(1)(A) (“EAJA”) to be paid to her attorneys directly (see ECF Nos. 17, 19). The Government does not oppose Plaintiff’s Motion or the amount requested (see ECF No. 20). Based on the parties’ agreement, the Court grants Plaintiff’s Motion for Attorney Fees and directs the Government to pay $5,103.00 to Plaintiff’s attorneys, Livgard, Lloyd & Christel PLLP. In accordance with Astrue v. Ratliff, 560 U.S. 586 (2010), the EAJA fees may be subject to offset or satisfy any preexisting debit that Plaintiff may owe the United States.

SO ORDERED.

Dated: August 24, 2023 s/ Dulce J. Foster Dulce J. Foster United States Magistrate Judge

Trial Court Opinion

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT DISTRICT OF MINNESOTA Stacy A.N., Case No. 23-cv-323 (DJF) Plaintiff, ORDER GRANTING PLAINTIFF’S v. MOTION FOR ATTORNEY’S FEES Kilolo Kijakazi, Defendant.

This matter is before the Court on Plaintiff’s Motion for Attorney Fees (“Motion”) (ECF No. 17). Plaintiff seeks attorneys’ fees in the amount of $5,103.00 pursuant to the Equal Access to Justice Act, 28 U.S.C. § 2412(d)(1)(A) (“EAJA”) to be paid to her attorneys directly (see ECF Nos. 17, 19). The Government does not oppose Plaintiff’s Motion or the amount requested (see ECF No. 20). Based on the parties’ agreement, the Court grants Plaintiff’s Motion for Attorney Fees and directs the Government to pay $5,103.00 to Plaintiff’s attorneys, Livgard, Lloyd & Christel PLLP. In accordance with Astrue v. Ratliff, 560 U.S. 586 (2010), the EAJA fees may be subject to offset or satisfy any preexisting debit that Plaintiff may owe the United States.

SO ORDERED.

Dated: August 24, 2023 s/ Dulce J. Foster Dulce J. Foster United States Magistrate Judge

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