Court, Explained
U.S. Federal District Courts
Back to docket
N.D. Cal.Procedural orderFiled Jan. 17, 2025

Abalos v. O'Malley

Docket
3:24-cv-04849
Court
U.S. District Court · Northern District of California
Pages
4
Social SecurityFee Petition
In one sentence

In Abalos v. Colvin, the court approved $7,500 in Equal Access to Justice Act attorney fees; the judge is identified only as the court.

Who this affects

Roberto Abalos and his attorney, Kevin LaPorte, received an order awarding $7,500 in Equal Access to Justice Act attorney fees, subject to the stipulation’s terms, including possible offset for a federal debt.

What happened

In Roberto Abalos v. Carolyn Colvin, the parties asked the court to approve an agreement resolving Abalos’s request for attorney fees under the Equal Access to Justice Act. The agreement provided for $7,500 for legal services in the case.

The agreement said the government would consider paying the award directly to Abalos’s attorney, Kevin LaPorte, after checking whether the fees were subject to an offset for a federal debt. It also said the payment would resolve all Equal Access to Justice Act fee claims related to the case and was not an admission of fault.

The court ordered that Abalos be awarded $7,500 in attorney fees under the Act, subject to the agreement’s terms. The judge’s name is not clearly readable in the opinion; the signature identifies the person only as a United States Magistrate Judge.

The detailed version

For law students, journalists, and other readers who want the full reasoning

Case
Abalos v. O'Malley · No. 3:24-cv-04849
Date
Jan. 17, 2025

Background

Roberto Abalos sued Carolyn Colvin, identified in the caption as Acting Commissioner of Social Security. The opinion text provided is a stipulation and proposed order concerning attorney fees, along with Abalos’s affidavit assigning any Equal Access to Justice Act (EAJA) fee award to his attorney, Kevin LaPorte.

The parties stipulated that the government would pay $7,500 under EAJA, 28 U.S.C. § 2412(d), for attorney fees, including costs, incurred in the district-court action. The stipulation stated that the payment represented compensation for all legal services provided by counsel in the action.

Fee assignment and settlement terms

Abalos stated that his net worth was less than $2 million when the action began and assigned any EAJA fee entitlement to LaPorte. He asked that the award be made payable to LaPorte rather than to him.

The stipulation stated that, after the fee order, the government would determine whether the award was subject to an offset under the Treasury Department’s Offset Program. If the Treasury Department determined that Abalos did not owe a federal debt, the check was to be payable to LaPorte. The stipulation also stated that the settlement was not an admission of liability or fault and that the $7,500 payment would fully resolve EAJA fee claims related to the action.

Ruling

The court ordered that Abalos be awarded $7,500 in attorney fees under 28 U.S.C. § 2412(d), subject to the terms of the stipulation. The text does not decide the underlying Social Security dispute or describe the result of that dispute. The judge’s signature is not clearly readable; the opinion identifies the signer only as a United States Magistrate Judge.

The authoritative version

Read the full 4-page opinion on CourtListener, the free public archive maintained by the Free Law Project.

Open opinion PDF →
Summary written with AI assistance. See how summaries are made. Spot something wrong? Tell us.