Ring v. Astrue
Filing
22
ORDER granting 18 Plaintiff's Motion for Attorney Fees. The Clerk shall enter judgment in favor of Plaintiff in the amount of $6,432.80 for attorneys' fees and $350.00 for costs against Defendant, with interest at the federal judgment rate from the date of entry of judgment. Signed by Judge Neil V Wake on 3/13/12.(LSP)
1
WO
2
3
4
5
6
IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
7
FOR THE DISTRICT OF ARIZONA
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
)
)
)
Plaintiff,
)
)
vs.
)
)
Michael J. Astrue, Commissioner of Social)
)
Security,
)
)
Defendant.
)
)
Ronald L. Ring,
No. CV 10-08217-PCT-NVW
ORDER
Before the Court is Plaintiff’s Motion for Attorney’s Fees Pursuant to the Equal
16
17
Access to Justice Act (Doc. 18).
18
I.
19
Background
Ring has hepatitis C, liver cirrhosis, and osteoarthritis in his right knee. He also is
20
morbidly obese. Ring protectively applied for disability insurance benefits and
21
supplemental security income, alleging disability since December 7, 2007. On December
22
9, 2009, Ring appeared and testified at an administrative hearing at which he was
23
represented by counsel. Victoria Rei, an impartial vocational expert, also appeared and
24
testified telephonically at the hearing.
25
On February 10, 2010, the Administrative Law Judge (“ALJ”) issued a decision
26
that Ring was not disabled within the meaning of the Social Security Act, which
27
subsequently became the Commissioner of Social Security’s final decision. On
28
1
November 10, 2011, the Court vacated the final decision of the Commissioner and
2
remanded the case for further proceedings.
3
Ring seeks an award of attorney’s fees pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 2412(d) in the
4
amount of $6,432.80 and costs in the amount of $350.00. The Commissioner opposes
5
Ring’s motion only on the ground that his position was substantially justified. The
6
Commissioner does not object to the amount of award requested.
7
II.
8
9
Legal Standard
On a motion for attorney’s fees and costs pursuant to the Equal Access to Justice
Act (“EAJA”), a prevailing party is entitled to attorney’s fees “unless th[is] court finds
10
that the position of the United States was substantially justified or that special
11
circumstances make an award unjust.” 28 U.S.C. § 2412(d)(1)(A). Under the EAJA, the
12
government’s “position” includes both its litigating position and the action or failure to
13
act by the agency upon which the civil action is based. 28 U.S.C. § 2412(d)(2)(D). Here,
14
then, it includes the ALJ’s decision and the Commissioner’s arguments to this Court in
15
defense of the ALJ’s decision.
16
The Supreme Court has defined “substantially justified” as “justified to a degree
17
that could satisfy a reasonable person.” Pierce v. Underwood, 487 U.S. 552, 565 (1988).
18
The government bears the burden of showing that its position was substantially justified.
19
Gonzales v. Free Speech Coalition, 408 F.3d 613, 618 (9th Cir. 2005).
20
III.
21
Analysis
As previously found, substantial evidence did not support the ALJ’s finding that
22
Ring’s skills acquired from past relevant work are transferable to other occupations with
23
jobs existing in significant numbers in the national economy. Specifically, the ALJ failed
24
to elicit whether the vocational expert’s testimony that a person with Ring’s limitation to
25
occasional kneeling could perform the job of “parts and order clerk,” whether the
26
vocational expert’s opinion conflicted with the Dictionary of Occupational Titles, and, if
27
so, whether there was a legitimate explanation for the conflict. The ALJ plainly failed to
28
-2-
1
fulfill his special duty to fully and fairly develop the record. See Smolen v. Chater, 80
2
F.3d 1273, 1288 (9th Cir. 1996).
3
Moreover, the Commissioner was not substantially justified in defending the
4
ALJ’s oversight in performing routine questioning of a vocational expert. Special
5
circumstances do not make a fee award unjust, and the EAJA therefore requires the Court
6
to award Ring attorneys’ fees and other expenses.
7
IT IS THEREFORE ORDERED that Plaintiff’s Motion for Attorney’s Fees
8
Pursuant to the Equal Access to Justice Act (Doc. 18) is granted. Plaintiff is awarded fees
9
in the amount of $6,432.80 and costs in the amount of $350.00.
10
IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that the Clerk enter judgment in favor of Plaintiff in
11
the amount of $6,432.80 for attorneys’ fees and $350.00 for costs against Defendant, with
12
interest at the federal judgment rate from the date of entry of judgment.
13
DATED this 13th day of March, 2012.
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
-3-
Disclaimer: Justia Dockets & Filings provides public litigation records from the federal appellate and district courts. These filings and docket sheets should not be considered findings of fact or liability, nor do they necessarily reflect the view of Justia.
Why Is My Information Online?