Clayton Wood v. Carolyn Colvin

Filing 24

ORDER RE: MOTION FOR ATTORNEY FEES. Signed by Magistrate Judge Jacqueline Scott Corley on 12/7/2015. (ahm, COURT STAFF) (Filed on 12/7/2015)

1
2
3
4

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

5

NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

6
7

CLAYTON WOOD,
Plaintiff,

8
9
10

United States District Court
Northern District of California

11

Case No. 14-cv-03764-JSC
ORDER RE: MOTION FOR
ATTORNEY FEES

v.
CAROLYN COLVIN,

Re: Dkt. No. 22

Defendant.

12
13

Now pending before the Court is Plaintiff’s motion for attorney’s fees pursuant to the

14

Equal Access to Justice Act, 28 U.S.C. § 2412(d). (Dkt. No. 22.) Under the EAJA, the

15

government is “liable for such fees and expenses to the same extent that any other party would be

16

liable under common law.” 28 U.S.C. § 2412(b). The statute has been construed to allow the

17

prevailing party to recover fees in cases involving “bad faith” by the government or an agency

18

“unless the court finds that the position of the United States was substantially justified or that

19

special circumstances make an award unjust.” Brown v. Sullivan, 916 F.2d 492, 495 (9th Cir.

20

1990) (quoting 28 U.S.C. § 2412(d)(1)(A)).

21

The party seeking fees must file an application within thirty days of final judgment in the

22

action. 28 U.S.C. § 2412(d)(1)(B). “An EAJA application may be filed until 30 days after a

23

judgment becomes ‘not appealable’—i.e., 30 days after the time for appeal has ended.” Shalala v.

24

Schaefer, 509 U.S. 292, 302 (1993). Pursuant to Federal Rule of Appellate Procedure 4(a), the

25

time for appeal in a civil case to which a federal officer is a party does not end until sixty days

26

after entry of judgment. Fed. R. App. P. 4(a)(I)(B)(i).

27
28

The Court entered judgment in this matter on August 14, 2015. (Dkt. No. 20.) The
judgment did not become final—i.e., “not appealable”—under Rule 4(a) until October 13, 2015.

1

Plaintiff filed the motion on September 10, 2015. Thus, the 30-day time period for filing an

2

application for EAJA fees had not yet begun when Plaintiff filed the instant motion. Defendant

3

therefore properly contends that Plaintiff’s motion was premature, and urges the Court to strike the

4

motion or hold it in abeyance until after the expiration of the 60-day period within which the

5

Commissioner may file an appeal and give the Commissioner 14 weeks to respond. (Dkt. No. 23.)

6

The Court deems Plaintiff’s motion filed timely filed as of October 14, 2015, and ORDERS

7

Defendant to respond to the motion by December 17, 2015. Plaintiff may file a reply December

8

23, 2015.

9
10

IT IS SO ORDERED.
Dated: December 7, 2015

United States District Court
Northern District of California

11
________________________
JACQUELINE SCOTT CORLEY
United States Magistrate Judge

12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
2