Mansour v. Saul

CourtDistrict Court, S.D. California
DecidedFebruary 23, 2022
Docket3:20-cv-01827
StatusUnknown

This text of Mansour v. Saul (Mansour v. Saul) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering District Court, S.D. California primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook
Mansour v. Saul, (S.D. Cal. 2022).

Opinion

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 9 SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA 10 11 VIVIAN MANSOUR, Case No.: 20-CV-1827-WVG

12 Plaintiffs, ORDER ON JOINT MOTION FOR 13 v. AWARD OF ATTORNEY’S FEES PURSUANT TO THE QUAL 14 KILOLO KIJAKAZI, Acting ACCESS TO JUSTICE ACT (28 Commissioner of Social Security, 15 U.S.C. § 2412(d)) Defendant. 16 17 18 On February 17, 2022, the Parties filed a Joint Stipulated for Award of Attorney’s 19 Fees Pursuant to the Equal Access to Justice Act (28 U.S.C. § 2412(d)) (“Joint Motion”). 20 (Doc. No. 16.) The Parties move the Court to approve an attorney fee award of $4,000.00 21 to Plaintiff’s counsel for “compensation for all legal services rendered… in connection 22 with this civil action…” (Id., 1:22-24.) For the reasons below, the Court GRANTS the 23 Parties’ Joint Motion, subject to any offset allowed under the United States Department of 24 the Treasury’s Offset Program, as agreed upon by the Parties. The Court elaborates. 25 Under the Equal Access to Justice Act (“the Act”), a prevailing party may seek 26 attorney’s fees from the Commissioner of Social Security within 30 days of the entry of 27 final judgment. See 28 U.S.C. § 2412(d). “A plaintiff who obtains a sentence four remand 28 is considered a prevailing party for purposes of attorneys’ fees.” Akopyan v. Barnhart, 296 1 F.3d 852, 854 (9th Cir. 2002). “A sentence four remand becomes a final judgment, for 2 purposes of attorneys’ fees claims brought pursuant to the EAJA, 28 U.S.C. § 2412(d), 3 upon expiration of the time for appeal.” Id. Federal Rule of Appellate Procedure 4(a)(1)(B) 4 sets a 60-day deadline to file an appeal in cases where the United States is a party. Fed. R. 5 App. P. 4(a)(1)(B). 6 The amount of fees awarded are based upon prevailing market rates for the kind and 7 quality of the services provided. 28 U.S.C. § 2412(d)(2)(A). The hourly rate may not 8 exceed $125 per hour “unless the court determines that an increase in the cost of living or 9 a special factor, such as the limited availability of qualified attorneys for the proceedings 10 involved, justifies a higher fee.” 28 U.S.C. § 2412(d)(2)(A)(ii). The Ninth Circuit's 2020 11 statutory maximum hourly rate under the EAJA, adjusted for increases in the cost of living, 12 was $207.78; the 2021 rate was $217.54. “Statutory Maximum Rates Under the Equal 13 Access to Justice Act,” 14 https://www.ca9.uscourts.gov/content/view.php?pk_id=0000000039 (last accessed 15 February 23, 2022) (citing 28 U.S.C. § 2412 (d)(2)(A); Thangaraja v. Gonzales, 428 F.3d 16 870, 876-77 (9th Cir. 2005); Ninth Circuit Rule 39-1.6). 17 Here, judgment was entered in favor of Plaintiff on November 12, 2021 pursuant to 18 sentence four of 42 U.S.C. section 405(g). (Doc. No. 15.) Because the time to file an appeal 19 has since expired, there is final judgment and the Parties’ Joint Motion is timely filed. Hoa 20 Hong Van v. Barnhart, 483 F.3d 600, 608 (9th Cir. 2007) (“a successful disability applicant 21 may file for attorneys’ fees 30 days after the 60–day appeal period provided for in Rule 22 4(a) has run, regardless of the specific form of the court's judgment, or the particular nature 23 of the government's non-opposition to or acquiescence in an award of benefits.”). Further, 24 given that Plaintiff’s counsel performed 20.8 hours of work on this case, 3.3 hours of which 25 were performed in 2020 under the hourly rate of $207.78, and the remaining 17.5 hours 26 which were performed in 2021 under the hourly rate of $217.54, the Court finds the 27 requested fee award is reasonable and fair. Accordingly, the Court GRANTS the Parties’ 28 Joint Motion and awards Plaintiff attorney’s fees in the amount of $4,000.00, subject to 1 offset allowed under the United States Department of the Treasury’s Offset Program, 2 || as agreed upon by the Parties and memorialized in their Joint Motion. 3 IT ISSO ORDERED. 4 || Dated: February 23, 2022 Se 5 Mw 6 Hon. William V. Gallo , United States Magistrate Judge

8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28

Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
Mansour v. Saul, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/mansour-v-saul-casd-2022.