Source: s3://data.kl3m.ai/documents/govinfo/USCOURTS/USCOURTS-azd-2_08-cv-01079/USCOURTS-azd-2_08-cv-01079-1/pdf.json

Nature of Suit Code: 863
Nature of Suit: Social Security - DIWC/DIWW (405(g))
Cause of Action: 42:405 Review of HHS Decision (DIWC)

---

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

WO

NOT FOR PUBLICATION

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

FOR THE DISTRICT OF ARIZONA

Kenneth Lemberg, 

Plaintiff, 

vs.

Michael J. Astrue, Commissioner of Social

Security, 

Defendant. 

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

No. CV-08-01079-PHX-FJM

ORDER

The court has before it plaintiff’s motion for attorney’s fees under the Equal Access

to Justice Act (“EAJA”), 28 U.S.C. § 2412(d) (doc. 22). The Commissioner did not respond.

In our Order of March 15, 2010, we remanded this case to the Commissioner because

the ALJ’s conclusions on plaintiff’s medical improvement and residual functional capacity

were inconsistent with plaintiff’s credited complaints and a medical opinion (doc. 20).

Plaintiff now requests an EAJA award in the total amount of $6,395.62, representing filing

costs in the amount of $350.00 and attorney’s fees in the amount of $6,045.62 for 35.1 hours

of work. He applied the statutory rate adjusted by a cost-of-living increase, resulting in a rate

of $172.24 per hour.

Under the EAJA, a party prevailing against the United States may be awarded fees

payable by the government if the government’s position in the litigation was not

Case 2:08-cv-01079-FJM Document 23 Filed 09/16/10 Page 1 of 2
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 -

“substantially justified.” 28 U.S.C. § 2412(d)(1)(A). We have discretion to consider the

government’s failure to respond “a concession that its position in the litigation was not

substantially justified.” Gwaduri v. I.N.S., 362 F.3d 1144, 1146 (9th Cir. 2004); see also

LRCiv 7.2(i) (allowing non-compliance with briefing requirements to be deemed consent to

the granting of a motion). Accordingly, after review of the government’s position and the

reasonableness of the fees requested, we grant plaintiff’s motion.

IT IS THEREFORE ORDERED GRANTING plaintiff’s motion for an award of

costs and attorney’s fees under the EAJA in the amount of $6,395.62 (doc. 22).

DATED this 15th day of September, 2010.

Case 2:08-cv-01079-FJM Document 23 Filed 09/16/10 Page 2 of 2