Sabriye v. O'Malley
U.S. District Court, District of Minnesota
Sabriye v. O'Malley
Trial Court Opinion
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
DISTRICT OF MINNESOTA
Maryan S. Case No. 22-cv-767 (TNL)
Plaintiff,
v. ORDER
Martin O’Malley,
Commissioner of Social Security,
Defendant.
Jyotsna Asha Sharma and Paul McGrath, Disability Partners, PLLC, 2579 Hamline
Avenue North, Suite C, Roseville, Minnesota 55113; and Mahesha Padmanabhan
Subbaraman, Subbaraman PLLC, 222 South 9th Street, Suite 1600 Minneapolis,
Minnesota 55402 (for Plaintiff); and
Ana H. Voss, Assistant United States Attorney, United States Attorney’s Office, 300
South 4th Street, Suite 600, Minneapolis, Minnesota 55415; Elvi Jenkins, Special
Assistant United States Attorney, 1301 Young Street, Suite 350, Mailroom 104, Dallas
TX 75202; and James D. Sides and Michael Moss, Social Security Administration,
Office of the General Counsel, Office of Program Litigation, Office 4, 6401 Security
Boulevard, Baltimore, Maryland 21235 (for Defendant).
This matter comes before the Court on Plaintiff Maryan S.’s Motion for an Award
of Attorney’s Fees Under the Equal Access to Justice Act (EAJA), ECF No. 49, regarding
fees and costs under EAJA, 28 U.S.C. § 2412(d).
Plaintiff requested an award of $28,810.47 in attorney fees. ECF No. 49 at 5. The
Court ordered Defendant Martin O’Malley to respond to Plaintiff’s request. ECF No. 51.
In response, the parties filed a joint stipulation and have agreed that Plaintiff be awarded
fees and costs under EAJA in the amount of $27,000. ECF No. 59 at 1. Accordingly,
pursuant to the parties’ agreement, the Court awards $27,000 in fees and costs under EAJA.
The parties do not say in their stipulation to whom the fees should be paid. Under Astrue
v. Ratliff, 560 U.S. 586 (2010), any award belongs to the plaintiff and not counsel.
Based on the foregoing, and all of the files, records, and proceedings herein, IT IS
HEREBY ORDERED that:
1. Plaintiff’s Motion for an Award of Attorney’s Fees Under the Equal Access to
Justice Act (EAJA), ECF No. 49 is GRANTED IN PART and DENIED IN
PART.
2. Plaintiff’s Motion is granted in part as follows:
a. Plaintiff is awarded $27,000 in fees and costs under EAJA.
b. Any EAJA fees shall be paid to Plaintiff as the litigant pursuant to
Ratliff.
3. Plaintiff’s Motion is otherwise denied.
4. The parties’ Stipulation, ECF No. 59, is ADOPTED.
Date: November 15, 2024 /s/ Tony N. Leung___________
Tony N. Leung
United States Magistrate Judge
District of Minnesota
Maryan S. v. O’Malley
Case No. 22-cv-767 (TNL) Trial Court Opinion
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
DISTRICT OF MINNESOTA
Maryan S. Case No. 22-cv-767 (TNL)
Plaintiff,
v. ORDER
Martin O’Malley,
Commissioner of Social Security,
Defendant.
Jyotsna Asha Sharma and Paul McGrath, Disability Partners, PLLC, 2579 Hamline
Avenue North, Suite C, Roseville, Minnesota 55113; and Mahesha Padmanabhan
Subbaraman, Subbaraman PLLC, 222 South 9th Street, Suite 1600 Minneapolis,
Minnesota 55402 (for Plaintiff); and
Ana H. Voss, Assistant United States Attorney, United States Attorney’s Office, 300
South 4th Street, Suite 600, Minneapolis, Minnesota 55415; Elvi Jenkins, Special
Assistant United States Attorney, 1301 Young Street, Suite 350, Mailroom 104, Dallas
TX 75202; and James D. Sides and Michael Moss, Social Security Administration,
Office of the General Counsel, Office of Program Litigation, Office 4, 6401 Security
Boulevard, Baltimore, Maryland 21235 (for Defendant).
This matter comes before the Court on Plaintiff Maryan S.’s Motion for an Award
of Attorney’s Fees Under the Equal Access to Justice Act (EAJA), ECF No. 49, regarding
fees and costs under EAJA, 28 U.S.C. § 2412(d).
Plaintiff requested an award of $28,810.47 in attorney fees. ECF No. 49 at 5. The
Court ordered Defendant Martin O’Malley to respond to Plaintiff’s request. ECF No. 51.
In response, the parties filed a joint stipulation and have agreed that Plaintiff be awarded
fees and costs under EAJA in the amount of $27,000. ECF No. 59 at 1. Accordingly,
pursuant to the parties’ agreement, the Court awards $27,000 in fees and costs under EAJA.
The parties do not say in their stipulation to whom the fees should be paid. Under Astrue
v. Ratliff, 560 U.S. 586 (2010), any award belongs to the plaintiff and not counsel.
Based on the foregoing, and all of the files, records, and proceedings herein, IT IS
HEREBY ORDERED that:
1. Plaintiff’s Motion for an Award of Attorney’s Fees Under the Equal Access to
Justice Act (EAJA), ECF No. 49 is GRANTED IN PART and DENIED IN
PART.
2. Plaintiff’s Motion is granted in part as follows:
a. Plaintiff is awarded $27,000 in fees and costs under EAJA.
b. Any EAJA fees shall be paid to Plaintiff as the litigant pursuant to
Ratliff.
3. Plaintiff’s Motion is otherwise denied.
4. The parties’ Stipulation, ECF No. 59, is ADOPTED.
Date: November 15, 2024 /s/ Tony N. Leung___________
Tony N. Leung
United States Magistrate Judge
District of Minnesota
Maryan S. v. O’Malley
Case No. 22-cv-767 (TNL) Reference
- Status
- Unknown