Jennifer W. v. Bisignano
- Dulce Foster
- 0:24-cv-04127
- U.S. District Court · District of Minnesota
- 2
In Jennifer W. v. Bisignano, Judge Foster approved a joint agreement awarding $14,150 in attorney's fees to the plaintiff under the Equal Access to Justice Act.
Individuals who have prevailed in Social Security cases and are seeking attorney's fees from the government under the Equal Access to Justice Act, and attorneys representing such clients.
What happened
In Jennifer W. v. Bisignano (Case No. 24-cv-4127), the plaintiff, Jennifer W., sued Frank Bisignano, Commissioner of Social Security. After the case concluded in her favor, her attorney filed a motion for attorney's fees under the Equal Access to Justice Act, a federal law that allows prevailing parties in certain cases against the government to recover their legal costs.
Before Jennifer W.'s attorney could discuss the fee request with the government's lawyers, she filed a formal motion. The parties later reached an agreement — called a joint stipulation — setting the fee amount at $14,150. Because that agreement resolved the original motion, the original motion was no longer needed.
Judge Dulce J. Foster approved the parties' stipulation and ordered the government to pay $14,150 in attorney's fees. The order notes that those fees may be reduced if Jennifer W. owes any pre-existing debt to the federal government. Depending on whether such a debt exists and whether the government waives certain legal requirements, the payment will go either to Jennifer W.'s attorney, J. Asha Sharma, or directly to Jennifer W. herself. The original motion for attorney's fees was denied as moot (meaning it was rendered unnecessary by the stipulation).
The detailed version
- Jennifer W. v. Bisignano · No. 0:24-cv-04127
- Dulce J. Foster
- Feb. 20, 2026
Background
Jennifer W. brought this action against Frank Bisignano in his capacity as Commissioner of Social Security. The opinion does not describe the underlying merits of the Social Security dispute; this order addresses only the question of attorney's fees following the case's resolution.
The court notes that, before consulting with opposing counsel, plaintiff's attorney filed a motion for attorney's fees (ECF No. 32) under the Equal Access to Justice Act (EAJA), 28 U.S.C. § 2412(d)(1)(A). The EAJA is a federal statute that permits a prevailing party in certain civil suits against the United States to recover attorney's fees from the government, provided the government's position was not substantially justified.
The Stipulation
After the initial motion was filed, the parties met and conferred and jointly filed a stipulation (ECF No. 36) agreeing to an award of $14,150 in attorney's fees. The court reviewed the stipulation together with plaintiff's supporting documents (ECF Nos. 34-2, 34-3, 34-4).
The Court's Ruling
Judge Foster approved the stipulation and ordered the government to pay $14,150 in attorney's fees to plaintiff Jennifer W. under the EAJA.
Pursuant to the Supreme Court's decision in Astrue v. Ratliff, 560 U.S. 586 (2010), the court noted that EAJA fees are subject to offset if the plaintiff owes a pre-existing debt to the United States under the Treasury Offset Program. The order sets out two scenarios for payment:
1. If no qualifying debt exists and the Commissioner waives the Anti-Assignment Act requirements: The fees will be paid directly to plaintiff's attorney, J. Asha Sharma. 2. If a qualifying debt exists: The fees cannot be assigned to counsel, and any remaining amount after offset will be paid by check made out to plaintiff Jennifer W. herself.
In either scenario, the check is to be delivered to J. Asha Sharma at 2579 Hamline Avenue North, Suite C, Saint Paul, MN 55113.
Because the stipulation resolved the underlying fee dispute, the original motion for attorney's fees (ECF No. 32) was denied as moot.
Anonymization Note
The court's footnote explains that the District has a policy of using only the first name and last initial of nongovernmental parties in Social Security matters — hence the plaintiff is identified as "Jennifer W." throughout.
Read the full 2-page opinion on CourtListener, the free public archive maintained by the Free Law Project.