T hi s di s pos i t i on i s notappr opr i a t e f orpubl i c a t i on and i s notpr e c e de nt * e xc e pta s pr ovi de d by9th C i r . R . 36- 3.

T he pa ne l una ni m ous l yc onc l ude s thi s c a s e i s s ui t abl e f orde c i s i on ** w ith o u t o r a l a r g u m e n t. See F ed. R . A pp . P . 34 (a )( 2). NOT F OR P UB L I CAT I ON UN I TE D STATE S C OU RT OF APPE ALS FOR T HE NI NTH CI RC UI T T E R R E NC E J . P E C K, P la in tif

f - A p p e llan t, v. SOCI AL SE CURI TY A D M IN IS T R A T IO N , C om m i ss i on er S oc i a l S e c ur i tyA dm i ni s tr a t i on, D ef

endant- A pp el l ee . N o. 08- 17777 D . C . N o . 3 : 0 4 -cv -0 2 2 8 3 -F JM ME MOR AN DU M *

A pp ea l fr om the U ni t ed S t at es D i stri ctC ou rt

f orthe D i s tr i c tof

A r i z ona F r e de r i c k J . M a rt one , D i s tr i c tJudge , P r e s i di ng

S ubm i tt e d M a y12, 2010 ** S a n F r a n c is c o , C a lif

o rn ia B efo re: H U G , R Y M E R an dM cK E O W N , C i rcu i tJu d g es. 

# FI LED MA Y14 2 010 M OLLY C. DW Y ER, CLERK U . S. C O U R T OF APPE ALSW e are co n cern edab o u tth e ap p el l an t ’ s b ri efi n g i n th i s case. T h e fi rst 1 ve r s i on of

the ope ni ng br i e f

tha tw a s f

i l e d w a s f

a t a l l yde f i c i e nt , a s w e r e the ne xt tw o. T he hard copy of the fourth w as the bri ef fi l ed i n a se para t e c as e w hi ch fa i l ed t o tra ck thi s c as e a tal l . F i l i ng no n-com pl i antbri ef s i s unacc ept abl e. C ou nselar e adm on i shed t o revi ew the F eder alR ul es of A pp el l at e P roce du re , and t o adh er e scrup u l o u sl y t o th ei r req u i rem en t s. T e rr e nc e J . P e c k appe a l s the di s tr i c tc ourt ’ s de ni a l of hi s m ot i on f

or a tt o rn e y ’ s f

e e s p u r s u a n tt o th e Eq u a l A c c e s s t o Ju s t i c e A c t( EA J A ) , 2 8 U . S. C. § 2 4 1 2 ( d ) ( 1 ) ( A ) . W e a f f i rm. 1 T he di s tr i c tc ourt ’ s de c i s i on w a s notba s e d on a n e rr one ous c onc l us i on of l aw , or w i tho utra t i on albasi s i n the re cord, as P ec k m ai nt ai ns. T he fa ctthatP ec k pr e va i l e d r a i s e s no pr e s um pt i on tha tthe gove rnm e nt ’ s pos i t i on w a s not s ubs t a nt i a l l yj us t i f

i e d. Kal iv. B ow en , 85 4 F . 2d 32 9, 33 4 (9th C i r. 19 88 ). R ather, f orr e a s ons the di s tr i c tc ourte xpl a i ne d, the A L J ’ s r e j e c t i on of

D r . S os c i a ’ s opi ni on a nd di s c ount i ng of

P e c k’ s s ubj e c t i ve c om pl a i nt s , a nd the gove rnm e nt ’ s de f e ns e of th e A L J ’s d e c is io n , w e r e b a s e din th e r e c o r de v e n th o u g h th is c o u rt u ltim a te ly d is a g r e e dw ith th e A L J ’s a s s e s s m e n t. Se e P i e r c e v . U nde rw ood , 487 U . S . 552, 569 (198 8). T he ca se s upo n w hi ch P ec k rel i es ar e di st i ng ui shabl e i n thatthe A L J her e d idn o t f a il to d o a n y th in g th a t h e w a s s up p o s e dto d o . C f . Shaf e rv . A s tr ue , 518 F .3 d1 0 6 7 , 1 0 7 2 ( 9 th C ir . 2 0 0 8 ) ; G u t i errez v. B a rn h a rt , 2 7 4 F .3 d1 2 5 5 , 1 2 5 7 ( 9 th C ir. 2 0 0 1 ). T h e d istrict co u rt d idn o t errin d eterm in in g th at th e g o v ern m en t’ sp o s itio n w a s s u b s ta n tia llyju s tif ie d . A c c o r d in g ly , it d idn o t ab u s e its d is c r e tio n in d en yi n g P eck ’ s m o t i o n fo r att o rn ey’ s fees. AF F I R ME D.