Ingrande v. Kijakazi

• Court: District Court, S.D. California
• Decided: April 26, 2023
• Docket: 3:22-cv-01574
• Status: Unknown

Opinion

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 9 SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA 10 11 MICHAEL JASPER INGRANDE, Case No.: 22-CV-1574-WVG

12 Plaintiff, ORDER GRANTING UNOPPOSED 13 v. MOTION FOR AWARD AND PAYMENT OF ATTORNEYS FEES 14 KILOLO KIJAKAZI, AND EXPENSES PURSUANT TO 15 Defendant. THE EQUAL ACCESS TO JUSTICE ACT, 28 U.S.C. SECTION 2412(D) 16 17 18 Pending before the Court is Plaintiff’s Unopposed Motion for the Award 19 and Payment of Attorney Fees and Expenses Pursuant to the Equal Access to Justice Act 20 (“EAJA”), 28 U.S.C. section 2412(d) (“Motion”). (Doc. No. 14.) The Motion is Plaintiff’s 21 second request seeking award and payment of attorney fees and expenses pursuant to the 22 EAJA. (See Doc. No. 12, 14.) As the Parties’ first motion for award and payment of 23 attorney fees and expenses (herein referred as “Stipulation for EAJA Fees and Costs”, Doc. 24 No. 12) was a joint stipulation and this instant Motion indicates that “Counsel for Plaintiff 25 conferred with SSA prior to the filings of this motion. SSA does not object to this motion” 26 (See Doc. No. 14 at 2, ¶3), the Court construes this instant Motion as being unopposed. 27 On March 6, 2023, the Parties filed a Stipulation for EAJA Fees and Costs. (Doc. 28 No. 12.) That same day, the Court denied, without prejudice, the Stipulation for EAJA Fees 1 and Costs due to the motion’s failure to provide factual detail necessary for the Court to 2 resolve the request. (Doc. No. 13.) The Court specifically sought details regarding 3 Plaintiff’s counsel’s hourly rate, Plaintiff’s counsel’s time records substantiating the 4 requested fees, and whether Defendant finds both of those metrics justified in light of this 5 litigation. Id. 6 Under the Equal Access to Justice Act (“the Act”), a prevailing party may seek 7 attorney’s fees from the Commissioner of Social Security within 30 days of the entry of 8 final judgment. See 28 U.S.C. § 2412(d). “A plaintiff who obtains a sentence four remand 9 is considered a prevailing party for purposes of attorneys’ fees.” Akopyan v. Barnhart, 296 10 F.3d 852, 854 (9th Cir. 2002). “A sentence four remand becomes a final judgment, for 11 purposes of attorneys’ fees claims brought pursuant to the EAJA, 28 U.S.C. § 2412(d), 12 upon expiration of the time for appeal.” Id. Federal Rule of Appellate Procedure 4(a)(1)(B) 13 sets a 60-day deadline to file an appeal in cases where the United States is a party. Fed. R. 14 App. P. 4(a)(1)(B). 15 The amount of fees awarded are based upon prevailing market rates for the kind and 16 quality of the services provided. 28 U.S.C. § 2412(d)(2)(A). The hourly rate may not 17 exceed $125 per hour “unless the court determines that an increase in the cost of living or 18 a special factor, such as the limited availability of qualified attorneys for the proceedings 19 involved, justifies a higher fee.” 28 U.S.C. § 2412(d)(2)(A)(ii). The Ninth Circuit’s 2022 20 statutory maximum hourly rate under the EAJA, adjusted for increases in the cost of living, 21 was $234.95. “Statutory Maximum Rates Under the Equal Access to Justice Act,” 22 https://www.ca9.uscourts.gov/attorneys/statutory-maximum-rates/ (last accessed April 26, 23 2022) (citing 28 U.S.C. § 2412 (d)(2)(A); Thangaraja v. Gonzales, 428 F.3d 870, 876-77 24 (9th Cir. 2005); Ninth Circuit Rule 39-1.6). 25 Here, judgment was entered in favor of Plaintiff on December 19, 2022 pursuant to 26 sentence four of 42 U.S.C. section 405(g). (Doc. No. 11.) Because the time to file an appeal 27 has since expired, there is a final judgment and the Motion is timely filed. Hoa 28 Hong Van v. Barnhart, 483 F.3d 600, 608 (9th Cir. 2007) (“a successful disability applicant 1 ||may file for attorneys’ fees 30 days after the 60-day appeal period provided for in Rule 2 || 4(a) has run, regardless of the specific form of the court's judgment, or the particular nature 3 ||of the government's non-opposition to or acquiescence in an award of benefits.”). As 4 ||PlaintifPs counsel performed 5.3 hours of work on _ this’ case, which 5 ||were performed in 2022 under the hourly rate of $234.95, the Court finds the 6 || requested fee award is reasonable and fair. 7 Accordingly, the Court GRANTS the instant Motion and awards to Plaintiff 8 || attorney’s fees in the amount of $1,245.24 and costs in the amount of $615.00. 9 IT IS SO ORDERED. 10 || DATED: April 26, 2023 : Se 11 Hon. William V. Gallo 12 United States Magistrate Judge 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28