Source: s3://data.kl3m.ai/documents/govinfo/USCOURTS/USCOURTS-caed-2_14-cv-02632/USCOURTS-caed-2_14-cv-02632-4/pdf.json

Nature of Suit Code: 864
Nature of Suit: Social Security - SSID Title XVI
Cause of Action: 42:205 Denial Social Security Benefits

---

-1-

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25

26

27

28

Steven G. Rosales

Attorney at Law: 222224

Law Offices of Lawrence D. Rohlfing

12631 East Imperial Highway, Suite C-115

Santa Fe Springs, CA 90670

Tel.: (562)868-5886

Fax: (562)868-8868

E-mail: rohlfing.office@rohlfinglaw.com

Attorneys for Plaintiff

Jonathan M.D. Schnell

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

JONATHAN M.D. SCHNELL,

Plaintiff,

vs.

CAROLYN W. COLVIN, Acting

Commissioner of Social Security,

Defendant.

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

No. 2:14-cv-02632-KJN (TEMP)

STIPULATION AND ORDER FOR THE 

AWARD AND PAYMENT OF ATTORNEY 

FEES AND EXPENSES PURSUANT TO 

THE EQUAL ACCESS TO JUSTICE ACT, 

28 U.S.C. § 2412(d)

TO THE HONORABLE KENDALL J. NEWMAN, MAGISTRATE JUDGE OF THE 

DISTRICT COURT:

IT IS HEREBY STIPULATED by and between the parties through their undersigned 

counsel, subject to the approval of the Court, that Jonathan M.D. Schnell be awarded attorney 

fees in the amount of THREE THOUSAND FIVE HUNDRED dollars ($3,500.00) under the 

Equal Access to Justice Act (EAJA), 28 U.S.C. § 2412(d). This amount represents compensation 

for all legal services rendered on behalf of Plaintiff by counsel in connection with this civil 

action, in accordance with 28 U.S.C. § 2412(d). 

Case 2:14-cv-02632-KJN Document 27 Filed 04/27/16 Page 1 of 4
-2-

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25

26

27

28

After the Court issues an order for EAJA fees to Jonathan M.D. Schnell, the government 

will consider the matter of Jonathan M.D. Schnell's assignment of EAJA fees to Steven G. 

Rosales. The retainer agreement containing the assignment is attached as exhibit 1. Pursuant to 

Astrue v. Ratliff, 130 S.Ct. 2521, 2529 (2010), the ability to honor the assignment will depend on 

whether the fees are subject to any offset allowed under the United States Department of the 

Treasury's Offset Program. After the order for EAJA fees is entered, the government will 

determine whether they are subject to any offset.

Fees shall be made payable to Jonathan M.D. Schnell, but if the Department of the 

Treasury determines that Jonathan M.D. Schnell does not owe a federal debt, then the 

government shall cause the payment of fees, expenses and costs to be made directly to Law 

Offices of Lawrence D. Rohlfing, pursuant to the assignment executed by Jonathan M.D. 

Schnell. United States v. $186,416.00, 722 F.3d 1173, 1176 (9th Cir. 2013) ($186,416.00 II)

(ordering fees paid to counsel because of an assignment that did not interfere with a raised 

superior lien).

1

 Any payments made shall be delivered to Steven G. Rosales.

This stipulation constitutes a compromise settlement of Jonathan M.D. Schnell's request 

for EAJA attorney fees, and does not constitute an admission of liability on the part of Defendant 

under the EAJA or otherwise. Payment of the agreed amount shall constitute a complete release 

 

1

The Commissioner does not stipulate to the citation of $186,416.00 II, and will not participate 

in representing to this Court that it carries legal import in these proceedings. $186,416 II 

involved a different statute and very different factual circumstances than those presented here, or 

in other Social Security cases. Because the parties have agreed to the payment of EAJA fees, 

and the amount, and to avoid motion practice solely related to Plaintiff’s citation, the 

Commissioner agrees to this stipulation. The Commissioner reserves the right to challenge the 

applicability of $186,416 II to any Social Security case, and this Stipulation should not be 

construed as a waiver of such reservation.

Jonathan M.D. Schnell contends that U.S. v. $186,416.00 in U.S. Currency, 642 F.3d 753, 757 

(9th Cir. 2011) ($186,416.00 I) held that there is no functional difference between the CAFRA 

and EAJA in terms of “ownership” of the fee. U.S. v. Kim, 797 F.3d 696, 699 (9th Cir. 2015) 

holds that the Anti-Assignment Act invalidates an assignment but does not preclude the attorney 

from gaining an interest in the fees. 

Case 2:14-cv-02632-KJN Document 27 Filed 04/27/16 Page 2 of 4
-3-

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25

26

27

28

from, and bar to, any and all claims that Jonathan M.D. Schnell and/or Steven G. Rosales

including Law Offices of Lawrence D. Rohlfing may have relating to EAJA attorney fees in 

connection with this action. 

This award is without prejudice to the rights of Steven G. Rosales and/or the Law Offices 

of Lawrence D. Rohlfing to seek Social Security Act attorney fees under 42 U.S.C. § 406(b), 

subject to the savings clause provisions of the EAJA.

DATE: April 6, 2016 Respectfully submitted,

 LAW OFFICES OF LAWRENCE D. ROHLFING

/s/ Steven G. Rosales

 BY: __________________

 Steven G. Rosales

 Attorney for plaintiff Jonathan M.D. Schnell

DATED: April 19, 2016 BENJAMIN B. WAGNER

United States Attorney

/s/ Theophous H. Reagans

 

 THEOPHOUS H. REAGANS

 Special Assistant United States Attorney 

 Attorneys for Defendant Carolyn W. Colvin, 

Acting Commissioner of Social Security 

 (Per e-mail authorization)

Case 2:14-cv-02632-KJN Document 27 Filed 04/27/16 Page 3 of 4
1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25

26

27

28

ORDER

Pursuant to the parties’ stipulation, IT IS SO ORDERED.

Dated: April 26, 2016

schnell2632.stip.eaja.ord

Case 2:14-cv-02632-KJN Document 27 Filed 04/27/16 Page 4 of 4