IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 

FOR THE DISTRICT OF OREGON 

TROY ALLEN EASTON, Civ. No. 6:14-cv-01538-CL 

Plaintiff, 

v. 

COMMISSIONER, SOCIAL SECURITY 

ADMINISTRATION, 

Defendant. 

CLARKE, Magistrate Judge. 

ORDER 

Plaintiff Troy Allen Easton ("Plaintiff') moves the Court for an award of $4,861.03 in 

attorney's fees under the Equal Access Justice Act ("EAJA"), 28 U.S.C. § 2412(d). Defendant 

Social Security Administration Commissioner ("Defendant") does not object to this request. 

Having independently reviewed Plaintiffs fee petition, the Court GRANTS his motion. 

BACKGROUND 

On September 26, 2014, Plaintiff filed a Complaint (#1) to obtain judicial review of 

Defendant's final decision denying his application for Social Security disability benefits. On 

Page I - ORDER 

Case 6:14-cv-01538-CL Document 33 Filed 03/23/16 Page 1 of 3
December 2, 2015, this Court remanded (#28) Plaintiffs case for further proceedings. On March 

7, 2016, Plaintiff filed his unopposed motion for EAJA fees (#30). 

LEGAL STANDARD 

A prevailing party in an action against the United States is entitled to an award of 

attorney's fees and costs under the EAJA unless the government demonstrates that its position in 

the litigation was "substantially justified" or that "special circumstances make an award unjust." 

28 U.S.C. § 2412(d)(l)(A). An EAJA fee award must be reasonable. Sorenson v. Mink, 239 F.3d 

1140, 1145 (9th Cir. 2001). In determining whether a fee is reasonable, the Court considers the 

hours expended, the reasonableness of the hourly rate charged, and the results obtained. Hensley 

v. Eckerhart, 461 U.S. 424, 434 (1983); Atkins v. Apfel, 154 F.3d 986, 988 (9th Cir. 1998) 

(applying Hensley to cases involving the EAJA). If the requested fees are not shown to be 

reasonable, then the Court may reduce the award. See Hensley, 461 U.S. at 433; Atkins, 154 F.3d 

at 988. 

DISCUSSION 

It is undisputed that Plaintiff is a prevailing party. Gutierrez v. Barnhart, 274 F.3d 1255, 

1257 (9th Cir. 2001) ("An applicant for disability benefits becomes a prevailing party for the 

purposes of the EAJA if the denial of her benefits is reversed and remanded regardless of 

whether disability benefits ultimately are awarded."). The Commission has not demonstrated that 

its position in denying Plaintiffs application was "substantially justified" or that special 

circumstances render the requested award unjust. Having reviewed the unopposed motion, the 

Court finds Plaintiffs petition is proper and the amount requested is reasonable. Accordingly, 

Plaintiffs application (#30) for $4,861.03 in EAJA fees is GRANTED. 

Page 2 - ORDER 

Case 6:14-cv-01538-CL Document 33 Filed 03/23/16 Page 2 of 3
Plaintiff assigned any EAJ A fees to his attorney. Pl.' s Mot, Ex. A. Therefore, the amount 

of this award shall be paid to Plaintiffs attorney upon verification that Plaintiff has no debt, 

which qualifies for offset against the award, pursuant to the Treasury Offset Program. See Astrue 

v. Ratliff, 560 U.S. 586, 589 (2010). Plaintiffs attorney's mailing address is as follows: 

Page 3 - ORDER 

Harder, Wells, Baron, & Manning, P.C. 

4 7 4 Willamette Street 

Eugene, OR 97401 

It is so ORDERED and DATED this )-3 day of 1'016. 

~----~ MARK D. CLARKE 

United States Magistrate Judge 

Case 6:14-cv-01538-CL Document 33 Filed 03/23/16 Page 3 of 3