(SS) Morales v. Commissioner of Social Security, 1:22-cv-00230-BAM

Plaintiff Robin Lyn Morales filed a Social Security appeal in the Eastern District of California (Case No. 1:22-cv-00230-BAM).
Parties filed a stipulation (filed Dec. 30, 2022) resolving Plaintiff’s request for attorney’s fees under the Equal Access to Justice Act (EAJA), replacing Plaintiff’s earlier EAJA motion (Dkt. 16) as moot.
The stipulation requested EAJA attorney’s fees of $5,906.67 and costs of $402.00, as full compensation for legal services in this action.
Plaintiff executed an assignment of EAJA fees to Olinsky Law Group; the government reserved the right to determine whether Treasury offset applies per established precedent.
The court (Magistrate Judge Barbara A. McAuliffe) approved the stipulation and ordered payment: fees $5,906.67 and costs $402.00, and denied the earlier EAJA motion as moot (Jan. 4, 2023).

Issue	Plaintiff's Argument	Defendant's Argument	Held
Entitlement to EAJA fees and costs	Morales sought EAJA fees ($5,906.67) and costs ($402.00) as reasonable compensation	Government stipulated to award those amounts	Court awarded EAJA fees $5,906.67 and costs $402.00 and denied the prior EAJA motion as moot
Payment to counsel under assignment and Treasury offset	Morales assigned EAJA fees to Olinsky Law Group and waived direct payment to herself	Government must determine if Treasury Offset Program applies before honoring assignment (per precedent)	If Treasury determines no federal debt exists, payment may be made directly to Olinsky Law Group; otherwise fees remain payable to Plaintiff subject to offset and government determination

Astrue v. Ratliff, 560 U.S. 586 (2010) (assignment of EAJA fees is subject to Treasury offset rules)