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

ORDER - 1

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

WESTERN DISTRICT OF WASHINGTON

AT TACOMA

DAWN M. RAYMOND,

Plaintiff,

v.

JO ANNE B. BARNHART, Commissioner of

Social Security,

Defendant.

CASE NO. C05-5581RJB

ORDER ADOPTING REPORT

AND RECOMMENDATION

This matter comes before the Court on the Report and Recommendation of the Honorable

J. Kelley Arnold, United States Magistrate Judge (Dkt. 38). The Court has considered the Report

and Recommendation, Defendant’s objections (Dkt. 39), Plaintiff’s response (Dkt. 40), and the

remainder of the file herein.

I. FACTUAL AND PROCEDURAL BACKGROUND

On July 15, 2008, the Ninth Circuit U.S. Court of Appeals reversed and remanded this

case, directing that the case be remanded to the Social Security Administration for the ALJ to

hear the testimony of a vocational expert at step five of the sequential evaluation process. Dkt.

30-2. Therefore, on July 16, 2008, the Court remanded this matter to the Social Security

Administration for further proceedings consistent with the decision of the Ninth Circuit. Dkt. 31.

On August 9, 2008, Plaintiff’s counsel moved for an award of attorneys’ fees, and the

motion (Dkt. 32) was referred to the Honorable J. Kelley Arnold, United States Magistrate Judge.
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

ORDER - 2

Dkt. 36. Judge Arnold recommends that the motion be granted. Defendant has objected to the

Report and Recommendation (Dkt. 39), and Plaintiff has responded to Defendant’s objections

(Dkt. 40). This matter is now ripe for decision. 

II. DISCUSSION

The Equal Access to Justice Act provides that a prevailing party may recover fees and

other expenses as follows:

(d)(1)(A) Except as otherwise specifically provided by statute, a court

shall award to a prevailing party other than the United States fees and other

expenses, in addition to any costs awarded pursuant to subsection (a), incurred by

that party in any civil action (other than cases sounding in tort), including

proceedings for judicial review of agency action, brought by or against the United

States in any court having jurisdiction of that action, 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)(1)(A). “Substantial justification” requires “a reasonable basis in law and

fact.” Shafer v. Astrue, 518 F.3d 1067, 1071 (9th Cir. 2008). The government’s position must be 

“justified in substance or in the main” or “to a degree that could satisfy a reasonable person.” but

need not be “justified to a high degree.” Corbin v. Apfel, 149 F.3d 1051, 1052 (9th Cir. 1998).

The Report and Recommendation concludes that the motion should be granted. Dkt. 38.

The Report and Recommendation is thorough, well-reasoned, and responsive to the parties’

contentions. The Court should therefore adopt the Report and Recommendation.

III. ORDER

Therefore, it is hereby

ORDERED that the Court ADOPTS the Report and Recommendation (Dkt. 38), and

Plaintiff’s Motion for Attorney’s Fees, Costs, and Expenses Pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 2412 is

GRANTED. Plaintiff’s counsel is awarded attorney’s fees in the amount of $18,737.73, costs in

the sum of $512.20, and expenses in the sum of $161.70 pursuant to the Equal Access to Justice

Act, 28 U.S.C. § 2412 and 28 U.S.C. § 1920.
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

ORDER - 3

The Clerk is directed to send uncertified copies of this Order to all counsel of record and

to any party appearing pro se at said party’s last known address.

DATED this 3rd day of November, 2008.

AROBERT J. BRYAN

United States District Judge