ALAZO
v.
COMMISSIONER OF SOCIAL SECURITY
AI-generated. These summaries, headnotes, and key points are machine-generated and may contain errors or omissions. Always verify against the full opinion text below. Not legal advice.
The court granted the plaintiff's motion for attorney's fees and costs under the Equal Access to Justice Act because the Commissioner did not oppose the request and the plaintiff met the statutory requirements.
The plaintiff moved for attorney's fees and costs under the Equal Access to Justice Act after his case was remanded. The Commissioner did not oppose t…
The full statement of facts, procedural history, and disposition for this case are member content.
Join FLexlaw to unlock all legal intelligence© FLexlaw, Inc. — AI-generated enrichments are proprietary. All rights reserved.
Explore caselaw by topic → Browse Offset For Pre-Existing Debt To The United States cases and more on FLexlaw
Sammy Alazo moves for attorney’s fees and costs under the Equal Access to Justice Act (EAJA), 28 U.S.C.
Section 2412. (Doc. 25). The Commissioner does not oppose the motion. (Id. at p. 6). Mr. Alazo requests $2,714.93 in attorney’s fees. The EAJA permits awards for reasonable attorney’s fees and costs to a prevailing party against the United States. 28 U.S.C. § 2412. A July 13, 2022 order remanded the Commissioner’s final decision under sentence four of 42 U.S.C.
Section 405(g) for further administrative proceedings. (Doc. 23). The Clerk entered judgment in Mr. Alazo’s favor. (Doc. 24). The Commissioner does not contest the following: Mr. Alazo is the prevailing party; Mr. Alazo’s net worth was less than $2 million when he filed his complaint; the Commissioner’s position was not substantially justified; and Mr. Alazo’s attorney’s fees request is reasonable. (Doc. 25, pp. 1-2). A court should grant a Social Security claimant’s request for attorney’s fees when it 1s unopposed. See Jones v. Colvin, No. 8:13-CV-2900-T-33AEP, 2015 WL 7721334 (M.D. Fla. Nov. 30, 2015) (awarding unopposed attorney’s fees request).
Thus, Mr. Alazo is entitled to $2,714.93 in attorney’s fees. Attorney’s fees awarded to a claimant under the EAJA can be offset to satisfy the claimant’s pre-existing debt to the United States. Astrue v. Ratliff, 560 U.S. 586, 589 (2010). Following an order, the United States Department of the Treasury will determine whether Mr. Alazo owes a debt to the United States. Mr. Alazo assigned his rights to EAJA fees to his attorney. (Doc. 25, Ex. 2). So, if Mr. Alazo has no federal debt, the United States will accept his assignment of EAJA fees and pay the fees directly to counsel.
Accordingly, it is ORDERED that Mr. Alazo’s motion for attorney’s and costs fees under the EAJA (Doc. 125) be GRANTED. Mr. Alazo should be awarded $2,714.93 in attorney’s fees. ORDERED in Tampa, Florida on September 14, 2022.
Aranda. Are he Sarma. AMANDA ARNOLD SANSONE | United States Magistrate Judge