Document ID: s3://data.kl3m.ai/documents/govinfo/USCOURTS/USCOURTS-cand-3_14-cv-00629/USCOURTS-cand-3_14-cv-00629-3/pdf.json

Parties Involved:
Caroline Colvin
Defendant
Kyle Dickey
Plaintiff

Document Text:

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

United States District Court

Northern District of California

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 

NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA 

KYLE DICKEY,

Plaintiff,

v.

CAROLINE COLVIN,

Defendant.

Case No. 14-cv-00629-WHO 

ORDER ON MOTION FOR 

ATTORNEY’S FEES

Re: Dkt. No. 27

On November 19, 2014, I granted plaintiff’s motion for summary judgment, denied the 

government’s motion for summary judgment, and remanded for payment of benefits. Dkt. No. 24. 

On February 10, 2015, I denied the government’s motion to alter or amend the judgment on the 

issue of the remand for payment of benefits. Dkt. No. 35. Currently before me is plaintiff’s 

motion for an award of attorney’s fees pursuant to the Equal Access to Justice Act (EAJA), in an 

amount of $9,014.55 for 47.5 hours at $189.78.hour. Dkt. No. 27. The government opposes the 

motion, in part, arguing that the amount of fees requested is unreasonable and any fee award 

should be paid to plaintiff, not plaintiff’s attorney. 

Under the Equal Access to Justice Act, “a court shall award to a prevailing party other than 

the United States fees and other expenses. . . unless the court finds that the position of the United 

States was substantially justified or that special circumstances make an award unjust.” 28 U.S.C. § 

2412(d). The fees requested and awarded must be reasonable. 28 U.S.C. § 2412(b); Costa v. 

Comm’r of SSA, 690 F.3d 1132, 1135 (9th Cir. 2012). 

The government does not argue that its position was substantially justified and does not 

challenge the reasonableness of the requested hourly rate. Instead, the government challenges the 

hours spent by counsel on three tasks and argues for a reduction of compensable time for those 

tasks. The government contends that: (i) spending two hours to review the answer was 

Case 3:14-cv-00629-WHO Document 38 Filed 03/13/15 Page 1 of 2
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

United States District Court

Northern District of California

unreasonable, only 1.5 hours should be compensated; (ii) spending 26 hours to draft the motion for 

summary judgment was unreasonable, only 16 hours should be compensated; and (iii) spending 17 

hours reviewing the cross-motion and drafting the reply was unreasonable, only 10 hours should 

be compensated. Oppo. at 4. 

Considering the “case-specific factors including, among others, the complexity of the legal 

issues, the procedural history, the size of the record,” Costa, 690 F.3d at 1136, I conclude that the 

hours expended on this case by plaintiff’s counsel were reasonable and grant the request for 

attorney’s fees in full. While the hours spent on a few of the challenged tasks may have been on 

the high end, the record in this case was dense. Moreover, plaintiff’s counsel has not sought fees 

for the time spent in opposing the government’s motion to alter the judgment and to strike 

plaintiff’s motion for attorney’s fees. Viewing the record as a whole, 47.5 hours is not an 

unreasonable time to have spent litigating this case. 

With respect to whom the fees should be paid to – plaintiff or plaintiff’s attorney –if 

plaintiff does not owe a government debt that qualifies for an offset under the Department of 

Treasury Offset Program, then payment should be made to plaintiff’s attorney pursuant to the 

assignment signed by plaintiff in favor of his attorney. Declaration of Steven Bruce, Ex. B. If 

plaintiff owes an offset, the remainder of the EAJA fees should be paid in accordance with the 

assignment to plaintiff’s attorney. 

IT IS SO ORDERED.

Dated: March 13, 2015 

______________________________________ 

WILLIAM H. ORRICK 

United States District Judge 

Case 3:14-cv-00629-WHO Document 38 Filed 03/13/15 Page 2 of 2