Court, Explained
U.S. Federal District Courts
Back to docket
N.D. Cal.Procedural orderFiled Mar. 26, 2021

Rosales v. Saul

Judge
Sallie Kim
Docket
3:19-cv-05573
Court
U.S. District Court · Northern District of California
Pages
3
Fee PetitionSocial Security
In one sentence

In Rosales v. Saul, Judge Kim approved a $6,600 Equal Access to Justice Act attorney-fee settlement for Rosales.

Who this affects

Frank Rosales, his attorney Angelina Valle and her firm, and the government are affected. Rosales is awarded $6,600, subject to Treasury’s potential offset and the payment terms in the stipulation.

What happened

Rosales v. Saul concerned a jointly submitted agreement about attorney fees incurred in the case. The parties asked the court to approve a $6,600 award under the Equal Access to Justice Act.

The agreement says the payment is made to Rosales, but it may be sent directly to attorney Angelina Valle if the Treasury determines Rosales does not owe a federal debt. The payment resolves claims for fees and expenses under that law, but does not prevent counsel from seeking fees under another Social Security fee provision.

Judge Sallie Kim approved the agreement and ordered that Rosales be awarded $6,600, subject to its terms. The order did not state that the government admitted liability.

The detailed version

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

Case
Rosales v. Saul · No. 3:19-cv-05573
Judge
Sallie Kim
Date
Mar. 26, 2021

Background

The parties submitted a stipulation asking the court to approve a settlement of Rosales’s request for attorney fees under the Equal Access to Justice Act (EAJA), 28 U.S.C. § 2412(d). The stipulation states that the agreed amount covers all legal services provided by Rosales’s counsel in connection with the civil action.

Settlement Terms

The agreed attorney-fee amount was $6,600. The fees are payable to Rosales. Under the stipulation, the government would consider assigning the fees to attorney Angelina Valle after the court entered the fee order. Payment could be affected by any offset under the U.S. Department of the Treasury’s Offset Program. If Treasury determined that Rosales did not owe a federal debt, the government would arrange for payment directly to Valle under Rosales’s assignment.

The stipulation described the agreement as a compromise settlement and said it was not an admission of liability by the defendant under the EAJA or otherwise. Payment would release and bar claims by Rosales, Valle, and Valle’s firm relating to EAJA fees and expenses in this action. The award did not affect counsel’s ability to seek attorney fees under 42 U.S.C. § 406(b), subject to the EAJA’s savings-clause provisions.

Ruling

The court approved the stipulation and ordered that Rosales be awarded $6,600 in attorney fees under 28 U.S.C. § 2412(d), subject to the stipulation’s terms. The order also admonished the parties to email proposed orders in Microsoft Word format with motions or stipulations requesting court action.

The authoritative version

Read the full 3-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.