Martinez v. Saul
- Proceeding
- district
- Area
- civil
- Panel
- Mitchell D. Dembin (author)
Analysis
The parties filed a joint motion for the award and payment of attorney's fees and expenses under the Equal Access to Justice Act (EAJA) following a remand of the plaintiff's social security appeal. The court granted the motion and awarded the plaintiff $7,500.00 in fees and expenses.
| What the court decided | The model |
|---|---|
Granting the joint motion for the award and payment of attorney's fees and expenses under the EAJA.“Accordingly, the Court GRANTS the joint motion and AWARDS Plaintiff attorney’s fees and expenses in the total amount of $7,500.00.” | agree with court The court correctly identified the plaintiff as a prevailing party under the EAJA following a sentence four remand, citing the controlling Ninth Circuit precedent in Akopyan v. Barnhart. The court accepted the parties' stipulation regarding the reasonableness of the fee amount, which is a standard procedural mechanism in EAJA fee applications. The reasoning is consistent with the law and the record presented. |
The order itself: sound — The order is procedurally correct and relies on the appropriate binding authority (Akopyan) to establish the plaintiff's status as a prevailing party and the timeliness of the motion. The court's acceptance of the stipulated fee amount is within its discretion and standard practice. There are no significant gaps or errors in the reasoning provided.
Opinion
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 8 SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA 9 10 SANCARLOS M., Case No.: 20cv1061-MDD 11 Plaintiff, ORDER GRANTING JOINT 12 v. MOTION FOR THE AWARD AND PAYMENT OF ATTORNEY FEES 13 ANDREW SAUL, Commissioner of AND EXPENSES PURSUANT TO Social Security, 14 THE EQUAL ACCESS TO Defendant. JUSTICE ACT 15 16 [ECF No. 20] 17 18 On June 10, 2020, Sancarlos M. (“Plaintiff”) filed this social security 19 appeal challenging the denial of his application for a period of disability and 20 disability insurance benefits. (ECF No. 1). On March 22, 2021, the Court 21 granted Plaintiff’s motion for summary judgment, denied Defendant’s cross- 22 motion for summary judgment, and remanded the matter to the Social 23 Security Administration for further consideration. (ECF No. 18). The parties 24 now stipulate to an award to Plaintiff of attorney’s fees and expenses in the 25 amount of $7,500.00 under the Equal Access to Justice Act (“EAJA”), 28 26 U.S.C. § 2412(d). (ECF No. 20). 1 || United States within thirty days of final judgment. 28 U.S.C. § 2412(d). “A 9 ||sentence four remand becomes a final judgment, for purposes of attorneys’ 3 ||fees claims brought pursuant to the EAJA, 28 U.S.C. § 2412(d), upon 4 ||expiration of the time for appeal.” Akopyan v. Barnhart, 296 F.3d 852, 854 5 || (9th Cir. 2002). If one of the parties is the United States, either party may 6 || file a notice of appeal within sixty days of the order appealed from. See Fed. 7 ||R. App. 4(a)(1)(B). “A plaintiff who obtains a sentence four remand is g ||considered a prevailing party for attorneys’ fees.” Akopyan, 296 F.3d at 854. 9 || Therefore, Plaintiff is the prevailing party in this action for purposes of 10 attorney’s fees, the parties’ joint motion is timely, and the Court finds the 11 stipulated amount of fees and expenses reasonable. 12 Accordingly, the Court GRANTS the joint motion and AWARDS 13 || Plaintiff attorney’s fees and expenses in the total amount of $7,500.00. Fees 14 || will be made payable to Sancarlos Martinez, but if the Department of the 15 || Treasury determines that Sancarlos Martinez does not owe a federal debt, 16 ||then the government will cause the payment of fees, expenses, and costs to be 17 ||made directly to Josephine M. Gerrard, pursuant to the assignment executed 18 ||by Sancarlos Martinez. Any payments will be delivered to Josephine M. 19 || Gerrard. 20 IT IS SO ORDERED. Dated: April 20, 2021 Mitt. VYlou Le Hon. Mitchell D. Dembin 23 United States Magistrate Judge 24 25 26 27