(SS) Acevedo Gomez v. Commissioner of Social Security
1:24-cv-00657
| E.D. Cal. | Apr 22, 2025Background
- Plaintiff Baldemar Acevedo Gomez filed suit seeking judicial review of a Social Security Administration (SSA) decision.
- On January 22, 2025, the court remanded the case to the Commissioner for further administrative action pursuant to sentence four of 42 U.S.C. § 405(g).
- Judgment was entered the same day, effectively making plaintiff a prevailing party.
- Plaintiff filed a motion for attorney's fees under the Equal Access to Justice Act (EAJA), 28 U.S.C. § 2412, requesting $4,600.00, which was stipulated and unopposed by the Commissioner.
- The court reviewed the stipulation, determined no special circumstances or substantial justification to deny fees, and considered federal offset procedures for fee payment.
- Both parties consented to proceed before a magistrate judge.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Entitlement to attorney’s fees under EAJA | Gomez is the prevailing party and entitled to fees | None (stipulated, unopposed) | Fees awarded as requested |
| Whether government’s position was substantially justified or if special circumstances apply | Neither justification nor special circumstances exist | None (stipulated, unopposed) | No bar to fee award found |
| Amount of EAJA fees to be awarded | $4,600.00 is appropriate and reasonable | None (stipulated, unopposed) | $4,600.00 awarded |
| Application of Treasury Offset Program to fee payment | Fees should go to counsel unless offset is due | None (stipulated, unopposed) | Fees paid to counsel unless offset |
Key Cases Cited
- Shalala v. Schaefer, 509 U.S. 292 (1993) (prevailing party under sentence-four remand order is entitled to EAJA fees)
- Astrue v. Ratliff, 560 U.S. 586 (2010) (EAJA fees subject to administrative offset for federal debts)