Moreno v. Kijakazi
- Haywood Gilliam
- 4:23-cv-04263
- U.S. District Court · Northern District of California
- 3
In Moreno v. O’Malley, Judge Gilliam approved $7,436 in Equal Access to Justice Act fees under the parties’ stipulation.
Juan Moreno, his attorney Katherine R. Siegfried, and the Commissioner of Social Security; the award may be reduced by an applicable federal-debt offset and may be paid directly to Siegfried if no offset applies.
What happened
In Moreno v. O’Malley, Juan Moreno and the Commissioner of Social Security jointly asked the court to approve an attorney-fee award under the Equal Access to Justice Act. The stipulation said Moreno was the prevailing party and had a net worth below $2 million.
The parties agreed to an award of $7,436 for all legal services provided by Moreno’s attorney, Katherine R. Siegfried, in this action. The fees are payable to Moreno, subject to possible federal-debt offsets; if no offset applies, payment may be made directly to Siegfried under Moreno’s assignment.
Judge Haywood S. Gilliam, Jr. ordered that the $7,436 award be paid subject to the stipulation’s terms. The agreement was a compromise and did not admit liability under the fee statute or otherwise.
The detailed version
- Moreno v. Kijakazi · No. 4:23-cv-04263
- Haywood Gilliam
- Jan. 30, 2024
Background
The parties submitted a stipulation seeking attorney fees under the Equal Access to Justice Act (EAJA), 28 U.S.C. § 2412(d). The stipulation stated that Juan Moreno was the prevailing party in the civil action and that his net worth was less than $2 million. It requested $7,436 as compensation for legal services provided by his attorney, Katherine R. Siegfried.
Fee terms
The stipulation described the requested payment as a compromise settlement of Moreno’s request for EAJA fees and expenses. It stated that the agreement was not an admission of liability by the defendant. Payment would release claims relating to EAJA fees and expenses in this action. The stipulation also stated that the award did not prevent Siegfried from seeking fees under 42 U.S.C. § 406, subject to the EAJA’s offset provisions.
Under the agreement, the fees are payable to Moreno. The government would determine whether the fees are subject to an offset for a federal debt. If no offset applied, payment would be made directly to Siegfried under Moreno’s assignment.
Ruling
Judge Gilliam ordered that fees of $7,436 be awarded subject to the terms of the parties’ stipulation. The order addressed the fee request and did not describe or decide the underlying Social Security dispute.
Read the full 3-page opinion on CourtListener, the free public archive maintained by the Free Law Project.