Groves v. Dept. Of Veterans Affairs
This text of 417 F. App'x 983 (Groves v. Dept. Of Veterans Affairs) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.
Opinion
ORDER
Gene S. Groves moves for fees under the Equal Access to Justice Act (EAJA) incurred during his appeal before this court.
On November 15, 2010, this court granted the Secretary of Veterans Affairs’ motion to remand Groves’ appeal to allow the United States Court of Appeals for Veterans Claims to rule on Groves’ pending motion for reconsideration. Groves appeared before this court without representation. Groves subsequently filed this motion seeking $10,280.98 in total expenses and fees, including $9,962.50 for 79.7 hours of legal research at $125.00 per hour.
Pro se litigants like Groves are not eligible to recover attorney fees under EAJA. Naekel v. Dep’t of Transp., F.A.A, 845 F.2d 976, 981 (Fed.Cir.1988) (“We conclude that neither EAJA nor the Back Pay *984 Act authorizes payment to Mr. Naekel for the time spent acting pro se in his appeal to this court.”); see also Hexamer v. Foreness, 997 F.2d 93, 94 (5th Cir.1993) (denying attorney fees under EAJA to pro se litigant); Demarest v. Manspeaker, 948 F.2d 655, 655-56 (10th Cir.1991) (same); Sommer v. Sullivan, 898 F.2d 895, 895-96 (2d Cir.1990) (per curiam), cert. denied, 498 U.S. 980, 111 S.Ct. 508, 112 L.Ed.2d 520 (1990) (same); Merrell v. Block, 809 F.2d 639, 642 (9th Cir.1987) (same). With regard to the additional amount Groves seeks for copying expenses and postage, this court’s prior remand order did not award him costs and he has never submitted an itemized and verified bill.
Accordingly,
It Is Ordered That:
The motion is denied.
Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI
Related
Cite This Page — Counsel Stack
417 F. App'x 983, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/groves-v-dept-of-veterans-affairs-cafc-2011.