Gomez v. Kijakazi
- Proceeding
- district
- Area
- civil
- Panel
- Mitchell D. Dembin (author)
Analysis
The court considered a joint stipulation for an award of attorney's fees under the Equal Access to Justice Act following a sentence four remand in a Social Security appeal. The court granted the motion and awarded the plaintiff $2,800.00 in fees.
| What the court decided | The model |
|---|---|
Grant joint motion for award of attorney's fees under the Equal Access to Justice Act“Accordingly, the Court GRANTS the joint motion and AWARDS Plaintiff attorney’s fees in the total amount of $2,800.00.” | 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 found the stipulated amount reasonable, which is a standard judicial function in EAJA fee awards, particularly when parties have stipulated to the amount. The procedural history (sentence four remand) supports the timeliness and eligibility for fees. |
The order itself: sound — The order is procedurally sound. It correctly applies the Ninth Circuit precedent from Akopyan v. Barnhart to establish that the plaintiff is a prevailing party entitled to EAJA fees following a sentence four remand. It correctly notes the timeliness of the motion based on the 60-day appeal period for cases involving the United States. The court's finding that the stipulated fee amount is reasonable is consistent with standard practice for EAJA fee awards. The order is concise but contains all necessary elements for a valid fee award.
Opinion
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 9 SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA 10 11 ANTHONY G., Case No.: 20cv2207-MDD 12 Plaintiff, ORDER GRANTING JOINT 13 v. STIPULATION FOR AWARD OF ATTORNEY'S FEES PURSUANT 14 KILOLO KIJAKAZI, Acting TO THE EQUAL ACCESS TO Commissioner of Social Security, 15 JUSTICE ACT Defendant. 16 [ECF No. 21] 17 18 19 On November 12, 2020, Plaintiff Anthony G. filed this social security 20 appeal challenging the denial of his application for disability insurance 21 benefits. (ECF No. 1). On November 15, 2021, the Court granted the parties’ 22 joint motion for voluntary remand pursuant to sentence four of 42 U.S.C. § 23 405(g). (ECF No. 19). The parties now stipulate to an award to Plaintiff of 24 attorneys’ fees in the amount of $2,800.00 under the Equal Access to Justice 25 Act (“EAJA”), 28 U.S.C. § 2412(d). (ECF No. 21 at 1). 26 The EAJA allows a prevailing party to seek attorney’s fees from the 1 ||sentence four remand becomes final judgment, for purposes of attorneys’ fees 9 ||claims brought pursuant to the EAJA, 28 U.S.C. § 2412(d), upon expiration of 3 ||the time for appeal.” Akopyan v. Barnhart, 296 F.3d 852, 854 (9th Cir. 2002). 4 || If one of the parties is the United States, either party may file a notice of 5 |}appeal within sixty days of the order appealed from. See Fed. R. App. 6 || 4(a)(1)(B). “A plaintiff who obtains a sentence four remand 1s considered a 7 prevailing party for purposes of attorneys’ fees.” Akopyan, 296 F.3d at 854. g || Therefore, Plaintiff is the prevailing party in this action for purposes of 9 ||attorney’s fees, the parties’ joint motion is timely, and the Court finds the 10 stipulated amount of fees and expenses reasonable. 11 Accordingly, the Court GRANTS the joint motion and AWARDS 12 || Plaintiff attorney’s fees in the total amount of $2,800.00. Fees will be made 13 ||payable to Anthony G. but if the Department of Treasury determines that 14 ||Anthony G. does not owe a federal debt, then the government will cause the 15 ||payment of fees to be made directly to Maren Bam, pursuant to the 16 ||}assignment executed by Anthony G. Any payments will be delivered to 17 || Maren Bam. 18 IT IS SO ORDERED. 19 ||Dated: February 10, 2022 . Miter Sou Le Hon. Mitchell D. Dembin 21 United States Magistrate Judge 22 23 24 25 26 27