Moss v. Bisignano
Moss v. Bisignano
Trial Court Opinion
DISTRICT OF MINNESOTA
Jaime M.1, Case No. 25-cv-00050 (DJF) Plaintiff, v. ORDER Frank Bisignano, Commissioner of Social Security, Defendant.
This matter is before the Court on Plaintiff’s Unopposed Motion for Attorney’s Fees Pursuant to the Equal Justice Act 28 U.S.C. § 2412(d) (“Fee Motion”) (ECF No. 27). Plaintiff seeks $7,878.43 in fees following remand of this action to the Commissioner for further administrative proceedings based on the parties’ stipulation (see ECF No. 23). Defendant does not oppose the Fee Motion or the amount claimed. (ECF No. 27.)
Pursuant to the Equal Access to Justice Act, 28 U.S.C. § 2412(d)(1)(A) (“EAJA”), and based on the Plaintiff’s submissions (ECF Nos. 27, 29) and the parties’ agreement, the Court grants the Fee Motion. The Government shall pay Plaintiff $7,878.43 in attorney fees. In accordance with Astrue v. Ratliff, 560 U.S. 586 (2010), the EAJA fees may be subject to offset to satisfy any preexisting debt Plaintiff may owe the United States. If, after receiving the Court’s EAJA fee order, the Commissioner: (1) determines Plaintiff does not owe a debt that is subject to offset under the Treasury Offset Program; and (2) agrees to waive the requirements of the Anti- Assignment Act, then the EAJA fees will be made payable to the law firm of Plaintiff’s attorney, Duncan Disability Law S.C. However, if there is a debt owed under the Treasury Offset This District has adopted a policy of using only the first name and last initial of any and the remaining EAJA fees after offset will be paid by check made out to Plaintiff.
Any checks issued for payment (regardless of whether the check is made out to Plaintiff or to the law firm of Plaintiff’s attorney), shall be delivered to the law firm of Plaintiff’s attorney at Duncan Disability Law S.C., 555 Birch Street, Nekoosa, WI 54457.
Dated: September 11, 2025 s/ Dulce J. Foster DULCE J. FOSTER United States Magistrate Judge
Trial Court Opinion
DISTRICT OF MINNESOTA
Jaime M.1, Case No. 25-cv-00050 (DJF) Plaintiff, v. ORDER Frank Bisignano, Commissioner of Social Security, Defendant.
This matter is before the Court on Plaintiff’s Unopposed Motion for Attorney’s Fees Pursuant to the Equal Justice Act 28 U.S.C. § 2412(d) (“Fee Motion”) (ECF No. 27). Plaintiff seeks $7,878.43 in fees following remand of this action to the Commissioner for further administrative proceedings based on the parties’ stipulation (see ECF No. 23). Defendant does not oppose the Fee Motion or the amount claimed. (ECF No. 27.)
Pursuant to the Equal Access to Justice Act, 28 U.S.C. § 2412(d)(1)(A) (“EAJA”), and based on the Plaintiff’s submissions (ECF Nos. 27, 29) and the parties’ agreement, the Court grants the Fee Motion. The Government shall pay Plaintiff $7,878.43 in attorney fees. In accordance with Astrue v. Ratliff, 560 U.S. 586 (2010), the EAJA fees may be subject to offset to satisfy any preexisting debt Plaintiff may owe the United States. If, after receiving the Court’s EAJA fee order, the Commissioner: (1) determines Plaintiff does not owe a debt that is subject to offset under the Treasury Offset Program; and (2) agrees to waive the requirements of the Anti- Assignment Act, then the EAJA fees will be made payable to the law firm of Plaintiff’s attorney, Duncan Disability Law S.C. However, if there is a debt owed under the Treasury Offset This District has adopted a policy of using only the first name and last initial of any and the remaining EAJA fees after offset will be paid by check made out to Plaintiff.
Any checks issued for payment (regardless of whether the check is made out to Plaintiff or to the law firm of Plaintiff’s attorney), shall be delivered to the law firm of Plaintiff’s attorney at Duncan Disability Law S.C., 555 Birch Street, Nekoosa, WI 54457.
Dated: September 11, 2025 s/ Dulce J. Foster DULCE J. FOSTER United States Magistrate Judge
Case-law data current through December 31, 2025. Source: CourtListener bulk data.