Court, Explained
U.S. Federal District Courts
Back to docket
N.D. Cal.Procedural orderFiled Sept. 2, 2025

Brooks v. Kijakazi

Judge
Robert Illman
Docket
1:23-cv-05512
Court
U.S. District Court · Northern District of California
Pages
2
Fee PetitionSocial Security
In one sentence

In Brooks v. Kyakazi, Judge Illman awarded $7,800 in Equal Access to Justice Act attorney fees.

Who this affects

Tyrrell Brooks and his attorney received an award of $7,800 in EAJA attorney fees, subject to the stipulation’s payment and offset terms; the Commissioner must apply those terms.

What happened

In Brooks v. Kyakazi, the parties agreed that the plaintiff’s attorney should receive $7,800 for work in the case under the Equal Access to Justice Act.

The agreement did not admit that the defendant was liable for the fees. Payment would be made to the plaintiff, with possible direct payment to the attorney if the Treasury Department found that the plaintiff owed no federal debt.

Judge Robert M. Illman approved the agreement and ordered the $7,800 fee award, subject to its terms.

The detailed version

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

Case
Brooks v. Kijakazi · No. 1:23-cv-05512
Judge
Robert Illman
Date
Sept. 2, 2025

Background

The parties submitted a stipulation asking the court to award $7,800 in attorney fees under the Equal Access to Justice Act (EAJA). The stipulation stated that the amount covered all legal services provided for the plaintiff in this civil action. The plaintiff’s attorney signed the stipulation as the plaintiff’s assignee, and counsel for the defendant also signed it.

Agreement and Payment Terms

The stipulation did not admit liability by the defendant under the EAJA. It stated that payment of $7,800 would fully release and bar the plaintiff’s claims for EAJA fees, expenses, and costs connected with the action. The award was also stated to be without prejudice to the attorney’s ability to seek fees under 42 U.S.C. § 406(b), subject to the EAJA’s savings-clause requirements.

The stipulation provided that payment would be made to the plaintiff. The Commissioner would determine whether the fees were subject to an offset through the Treasury Department’s Offset Program. If the Treasury Department determined that the plaintiff did not owe a federal debt, the payment would be made directly to the plaintiff’s attorney under the assignment signed by Mr. Brooks.

Ruling

Judge Robert M. Illman ordered that the plaintiff be awarded $7,800 in attorney fees under the EAJA, as authorized by 28 U.S.C. §§ 1920 and 2412(d), subject to the terms of the parties’ stipulation.

The authoritative version

Read the full 2-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.