Source: s3://data.kl3m.ai/documents/govinfo/USCOURTS/USCOURTS-caed-1_13-cv-00931/USCOURTS-caed-1_13-cv-00931-3/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

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

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

ERNESTO DALES LONGORIA,

Plaintiff,

vs.

CAROLYN W. COLVIN, 

Acting Commissioner of Social Security,

Defendant.

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

Case No. 1:13-cv-00931-SKO 

STIPULATION AND ORDER FOR 

ATTORNEY’S FEES UNDER

28 U.S.C. § 2412 (d) 

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

counsel, subject to the approval of the Court, that Ernesto Dales Longoria be awarded attorney 

fees and expenses in the amount of four thousand four hundred dollars ($4,400.00) 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. §§ 1920; 2412(d). 

After the Court issues an order for EAJA fees to Ernesto Dales Longoria, the government 

will consider the matter of Ernesto Dales Longoria's assignment of EAJA fees to Young Cho. The 

retainer agreement containing the assignment is attached as exhibit 1. Pursuant to Astrue v. 

Case 1:13-cv-00931-SKO Document 22 Filed 05/20/14 Page 1 of 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

2

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 Ernesto Dales Longoria, but if the Department of the 

Treasury determines that Ernesto Dales Longoria 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 Ernesto Dales 

Longoria. 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 Young Cho.

This stipulation constitutes a compromise settlement of Ernesto Dales Longoria'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 

from, and bar to, any and all claims that Ernesto Dales Longoria and/or Young Cho, including the 

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 Young Cho 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.

///

///

 

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.

Ernesto Longoria 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.

Case 1:13-cv-00931-SKO Document 22 Filed 05/20/14 Page 2 of 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

3

DATE: May 19, 2014 Respectfully submitted,

 LAW OFFICES OF LAWRENCE D. ROHLFING

/s/ Young Cho

 BY: __________________

 Young Cho 

 Attorney for plaintiff Ernesto Dales Longoria

DATE: May 19, 2014 BENJAMIN B. WAGNER

 United States Attorney

/s/ Timothy R. Bolin

 

 Timothy R. Bolin

 Special Assistant United States Attorney 

 Attorneys for Defendant Carolyn W. Colvin, 

Acting Commissioner of Social Security 

 (Per e-mail authorization)

ORDER

Pursuant to the parties’ Stipulation, IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that Plaintiff shall be 

awarded FOUR THOUSAND FOUR HUNDRED dollars ($4,400) in attorney's fees and expenses, 

subject to the terms of the above-referenced Stipulation.

IT IS SO ORDERED.

Dated: May 20, 2014 /s/ Sheila K. Oberto 

UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE

Case 1:13-cv-00931-SKO Document 22 Filed 05/20/14 Page 3 of 3