Opinion ID: 168407
Heading Depth: 2
Heading Rank: 4

Heading: Controlling Standards Under EAJA.

Text: 34 Under EAJA, a fee award is required if: (1) plaintiff is a prevailing party; (2) the position of the United States was not substantially justified; and (3) there are no special circumstances that make an award of fees unjust. 28 U.S.C. § 2412(d)(1)(A). The only dispute in this appeal is whether the Commissioner's position was substantially justified. 35 As the Supreme Court recently reiterated in Scarborough, 541 U.S. at 414, 124 S.Ct. 1856, the Commissioner had the burden of proof to show that her position was substantially justified. See Gilbert v. Shalala, 45 F.3d 1391, 1394 (10th Cir. 1995). The test for substantial justification in this circuit is one of reasonableness in law and fact. Id. Thus, the government's position must be justified to a degree that could satisfy a reasonable person. Pierce v. Underwood, 487 U.S. 552, 565, 108 S.Ct. 2541, 101 L.Ed.2d 490 (1988). The government's position can be justified even though it is not correct. Id. at 566 n. 2, 108 S.Ct. 2541. 36 We review the district court's determination that the Commissioner's position was substantially justified for an abuse of discretion. See Gilbert, 45 F.3d at 1394. An abuse of discretion occurs when the district court bases its ruling on an erroneous conclusion of law or relies on clearly erroneous fact findings. Kiowa Indian Tribe of Okla. v. Hoover, 150 F.3d 1163, 1165 (10th Cir.1998). 37