Kortcamp v. Kijakazi
- Proceeding
- district
- Area
- civil
- Panel
- Lupe Rodriguez (author)
Analysis
The parties filed a joint motion for attorney fees and expenses under the Equal Access to Justice Act (EAJA) but failed to include a billing statement or information regarding hours and rates. The court ordered the parties to submit a joint supplemental brief containing the necessary billing details and attorney qualifications by May 29, 2024.
| What the court decided | The model |
|---|---|
Order requiring supplemental briefing on Joint Motion for Award of Attorney Fees and Expenses“The Court ORDERS the parties to submit a joint supplemental brief to include the names, qualifications, experience, and hourly billing rates of all attorneys and paralegals who worked on this case on Plaintiff's behalf.” | agree with court The court correctly identified that it cannot assess the reasonableness of the requested fees without the specific billing data (hours and rates) required by the EAJA standard. Requiring supplemental briefing is a standard procedural mechanism to complete the record before ruling on a fee petition. |
The order itself: sound — The order is procedurally sound. It correctly applies the EAJA standard by identifying that the 'reasonableness' prong cannot be evaluated without the specific billing data (hours and rates) which the parties omitted from their joint motion. The remedy of ordering supplemental briefing is appropriate and standard practice in this district for incomplete fee petitions.
Opinion
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 9 SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA 10 11 GINA K.1, Case No.: 22cv1484-LR 12 Plaintiff, ORDER REQUIRING 13 v. SUPPLEMENTAL BRIEFING ON JOINT MOTION FOR AWARD OF 14 MARTIN O’MALLEY, Commissioner of ATTORNEY FEES AND Social Security, 15 EXPENSES Defendant. 16 [ECF No. 19] 17 18 19 20 Presently before the Court is a “Joint Motion for the Award and Payment of 21 Attorney Fees and Expenses Pursuant to the Equal Access to Justice Act, 28 U.S.C. § 22 2412(d) and Costs Pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1920.” (ECF No. 19.) The parties jointly 23 move the Court to award Plaintiff Gina K. attorney fees and expenses pursuant to the 24 Equal Access to Justice Act (“EAJA”). (See id.) 25 Under the EAJA, a litigant is entitled to attorney fees and costs if: “(1) he is the 26 27 1 Pursuant to Civil Local Rule 7.1(e)(6)(b), “[o]pinions by the Court in [Social Security cases under 42 28 1 || prevailing party; (2) the government fails to show that its position was substantially 2 justified or that special circumstances make an award unjust; and (3) the requested fees 3 || and costs are reasonable.” Carbonell v. I.N.S., 429 F.3d 894, 898 (9th Cir. 2005). In 4 || assessing the third factor of whether the requested fees are reasonable, the Court looks to 5 || whether the hourly rates and number of hours billed are reasonable. See, e.g., Beatriz B. 6 || v. Saul, Case No.: 3:19-cv-785-AHG, 2020 WL 5203371, at *2-3 (S.D. Cal. Sept. 1, 7 2020) (noting that attorney fees are awarded based on prevailing market rates for the kind 8 || and quality of the services provided). 9 The parties here have not included a billing statement with their joint motion, or 10 |} any information regarding the number of hours billed, and at what rates. Because this 11 ||information is needed to assess the reasonableness of the requested fees, the Court 12 |} ORDERS the parties to submit a joint supplemental brief to include the names, 13 || qualifications, experience, and hourly billing rates of all attorneys and paralegals who 14 || worked on this case on Plaintiff's behalf. The parties shall also attach Plaintiff's billing 15 || statement as an exhibit, which should include dates, time spent, attorney or paralegal 16 || designation, descriptions of actions, and totals. The joint supplemental brief shall be 17 submitted no later than May 29, 2024. 18 IT IS SO ORDERED. 19 Dated: May 15, 2024 20 21 / LZ 22 Honorable Lupe Rodriguez, Jr. 73 United States Magistrate Judge 24 25 26 27 28