S. et al v. DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA PUBLIC SCHOOLS
Filing
30
MEMORANDUM OPINION re plaintiffs' 25 Motion for Attorneys' Fees and Costs. See Opinion and accompanying 31 Order for details. Signed by Judge Ellen S. Huvelle on August 30, 2016. (lcesh1)
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
FOR THE DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA
_________________________________________
)
DAMARCUS S., by and through his
)
Parent, K.S.,
)
)
Plaintiffs,
)
)
v.
)
)
DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA,
)
)
Defendant.
)
_________________________________________ )
Civil Action No. 15-851 (ESH)
MEMORANDUM OPINION
Plaintiffs Damarcus S. and his mother, K.S., have moved for attorney’s fees and costs
pursuant to the Individuals with Disabilities Education Act (“IDEA”), 20 U.S.C. §§ 1400 et seq.,
which grants the Court discretion to award reasonable fees to a prevailing party. See id.
§ 1415(i)(3)(B). (Pl.’s Mot. for Attorneys’ Fees and Costs [ECF No. 25] (“Pls.’ Mot.”).) The
District of Columbia (the “District”) does not dispute that plaintiffs are entitled to fees, but it
argues that plaintiffs’ request of $212,081.51 in fees and $4,097.60 in costs is unreasonable and
should be denied in part. (See Def.’s Opp’n Br. [ECF No. 27] at 3.) The Court agrees that
plaintiffs are not entitled to the full amount requested, though they are entitled to more than the
District proposes to pay. Therefore, plaintiffs’ motion will be granted in part and denied in part.
BACKGROUND
The background of this case has been laid out in great detail in the Court’s previous
Memorandum Opinion. See Damarcus S. v. Dist. of Columbia, 2016 WL 2993158, at *1-*2
(D.D.C. May 23, 2016). As is relevant here, plaintiffs filed an administrative complaint with the
District in December 2014, alleging that numerous deficiencies in the District’s educational
plans for Damarcus denied him a Free Appropriate Public Education (“FAPE”), to which he is
entitled under IDEA.1 Id. at *2. After an administrative Due Process Hearing in March 2015,
the Hearing Officer determined that plaintiffs were time-barred from pursuing any claims
involving conduct prior to December 16, 2012, and rejected all but one of plaintiffs’ remaining
claims on the merits. Id. As a result of the District’s failure to conduct a behavioral assessment
and put in place an intervention plan for Damarcus in 2013 and 2014, plaintiffs were awarded
(1) reimbursement for an independent behavioral evaluation of Damarcus, and (2) fifty hours of
behavioral support services. Id. But without explanation, the Hearing Officer ruled that those
behavioral-support hours would be forfeited if plaintiffs did not use them before June 30, 2016.
Id.
Plaintiffs filed suit in this Court to challenge the Hearing Officer’s adverse
determinations, and the parties then cross-moved for summary judgment. The Court found for
plaintiffs on many claims: (1) that the Hearing Officer erred in her blanket dismissal of all claims
arising out of pre-December 2012 conduct, rather than conducting an individualized analysis of
when plaintiffs knew or should have known about each claim, id. at *6; (2) that the District
denied Damarcus a FAPE in 2013 and 2014 by dramatically cutting his speech-language services
and failing to adjust his Individualized Education Program (“IEP”) in response to his
demonstrated lack of progress, id. at *12; (3) that the Hearing Officer’s compensatory award was
improperly limited as to both subject (behavioral support services) and time (the June 2016
forfeiture provision), id. at *14; (4) that the compensatory award of fifty hours was insufficient
1
Plaintiffs also filed two previous complaints that involved similar claims, but they were
withdrawn prior to being adjudicated. Damarcus S., 2016 WL 2993158, at *2.
2
by failing to reflect the pervasive effect of Damarcus’s behavior on all aspects of his education,
id. at *14-*15; and (5) that plaintiffs were entitled to reimbursement for an independent
neuropsychological evaluation of Damarcus, id. at *15. In light of deficiencies in the record, the
Court remanded to the Hearing Officer to allow the parties to more fully brief the issue of an
appropriate award of compensatory education. Id. at *12, *15.
On the other hand, the Court rejected plaintiffs’ remaining claims: (1) that Damarcus’s
2013 and 2014 IEPs were necessarily deficient because they relied on deficient
neuropsychological and speech-language evaluations, id. at *8; (2) that Damarcus was denied a
FAPE because his IEPs failed to set out measureable baselines, failed to specify that he would
receive research-based, peer-reviewed instruction, and set inappropriately low benchmarks, id. at
*9-*10; (3) that the District failed to place Damarcus in the least restrictive environment, id. at
*12; (4) that the District inappropriately implemented Damarcus’s IEPs, id. at *13; (5) that the
District’s treatment of Damarcus violated Section 504 of the Rehabilitation Act, id. at *16; and
(6) that the District should be required to immediately develop an appropriate IEP, id. at *17.
ANALYSIS
The District does not dispute plaintiffs’ entitlement to attorney’s fees, given the many
claims on which plaintiffs have prevailed. However, the District argues that the award requested
by plaintiffs is unreasonable on several grounds, which the Court will now turn to.
I. UNREASONABLE BILLING RATES
The District first argues that the hourly rates sought by plaintiffs’ attorneys and
paralegals are unreasonable. (Def.’s Opp’n Br. at 4–11.) In determining a reasonable fee award,
the Court must ensure that it is “based on rates prevailing in the community in which the action
or proceeding arose for the kind and quality of services furnished.” 20 U.S.C. § 1415(i)(3)(C).
3
Plaintiffs bear the burden on this issue, as with all other aspects of their fee request. See
Covington v. Dist. of Columbia, 57 F.3d 1101, 1107 (D.C. Cir. 1995) (“[A] fee applicant bears
the burden of establishing entitlement to an award, documenting the appropriate hours, and
justifying the reasonableness of the rates[.]”).
In addition to offering their own attorneys’ affidavits, fee applicants may also “submit
attorneys’ fee matrices as one type of evidence that ‘provide[s] a useful starting point’ in
calculating the prevailing market rate.” Eley v. Dist. of Columbia, 793 F.3d 97, 100 (D.C. Cir.
2015) (quoting Covington, 57 F.3d at 1109). These matrices set out the hourly fees charged by
attorneys at various levels of experience in a particular community for the same type of work,
which offer a “somewhat crude” approximation of prevailing market rates. Snead v. Dist. of
Columbia, 139 F. Supp. 3d 375, 378 (D.D.C. 2015) (quoting Eley, 793 F.3d at 101). The most
commonly used fee matrix was the “Laffey Matrix,” which was compiled by the District United
States Attorney’s Office (“USAO”) and updated annually to adjust for inflation. Eley, 793 F.3d
at 100-01. However, beginning on June 1, 2015, the USAO discontinued the Laffey Matrix in
favor of a matrix that uses a new methodology, which the Court will refer to as the “USAO
Matrix.” See USAO Attorney’s Fees Matrix – 2015 – 2016, https://www.justice.gov/usaodc/file/796471/download.2
Here, plaintiffs’ counsel submit an affidavit from Dennis C. McAndrews, the Managing
Partner at their firm, which attests that these “hourly rates for attorneys of comparable
2
The USAO Matrix rates are generally higher than the previous year’s Laffey Matrix rates.
Compare USAO Attorney’s Fees Matrix – 2015 – 2016, https://www.justice.gov/usaodc/file/796471/download, with Laffey Matrix – 2014-2015,
https://www.justice.gov/sites/default/files/usao-dc/legacy/2014/07/14/Laffey%20Matrix_20142015.pdf. That said, once annual inflation is considered, the matrices are similar enough to make
reliance on Laffey Matrix cases appropriate here. Indeed, the parties’ briefs tend to use the
“Laffey” and “USAO” descriptors interchangeably. (See Def.’s Opp’n Br. at 6 n.2.)
4
experience and skill in this area are at least equal to, and frequently exceed, the hourly rates”
they have requested. (Ex. B to Pls.’ Mot. [ECF No. 25-3] ¶ 17.) They also submit affidavits
from local attorneys who did not work on this case, stating that the rates charged by plaintiffs’
attorneys are consistent with those charged by their firms and other area firms, including in
IDEA cases. (Ex. 1 to Pls.’ Reply Br. [ECF No. 29-1] ¶¶ 13, 22; Ex. 2 to Pls.’ Reply Br. [ECF
No. 29-2] ¶ 10.) Finally, they submit the 2015-16 USAO Matrix, which reflects rates charged in
District of Columbia courts in civil cases where a fee-shifting statute permits the prevailing party
to recover “reasonable” attorney’s fees.3 (Ex. C. to Pls.’ Mot. at 1 & n.1.) The attorney rates
listed in the 2015-16 USAO Matrix are uniformly higher than those sought by plaintiffs.
(Compare Ex. A to Pls.’ Mot. with Ex. C to Pl.’s Mot. at 1.)
The District argues that the rates in the Laffey or USAO Matrices should not be applied
here, because those matrices establish presumptive rates for more complex federal litigation than
typical IDEA administrative proceedings. (Def.’s Opp’n Br. at 6.) Instead, it argues that
plaintiffs should receive 75% of Laffey or USAO rates because “the overwhelming majority of
cases apply[] [such] rates to similar [IDEA] litigation, especially in cases since Eley.” (Id. at 7 &
n.4, 9.) Plaintiffs respond by citing a slew of post-Eley cases in which full Laffey or USAO rates
were awarded in IDEA cases. (See Pls.’ Reply Br. at 6 n.1.)
At the outset, it is worth repeating that plaintiffs do not seek full USAO rates, or even a
uniform percentage of them. Instead, they seek the rates customarily charged by their firm (see
Ex. B to Pls.’ Mot. ¶ 4), which vary by attorney and are uniformly lower than the USAO Matrix
rates. For instance, Dennis McAndrews’ rate of $450 is only 79% of what an attorney of his
3
By its own terms, the USAO Matrix is appropriately considered in this federal IDEA case,
given the IDEA’s fee shifting provision. (See Ex. C. to Pls.’ Mot. at 1 & n.1; 20 U.S.C. §
1415(i)(3)(B).)
5
experience level (38 years) would receive under the current USAO Matrix. In fact, two junior
attorneys who worked on the case are billed at rates less than 75% of the current USAO rate.
(See id. ¶ 11; Ex. A to Pls.’ Mot. (billing out fourth-year attorneys at $230/hour and $240/hour,
which is 71% and 74% of the USAO rates, respectively). The highest attorney rates sought by
plaintiffs in relation to the current USAO Matrix are only 85% of those rates. (See Ex. A to Pls.’
Mot. (billing out Attorney CEM (4 years) at $275/hour, where full USAO rate is $325/hour).
Thus, the District’s argument about the applicability of full Laffey or USAO rates in IDEA
litigation is off the mark—the relevant question is whether plaintiffs have shouldered their
burden to show that the rates they actually seek are reasonable.
Moreover, plaintiffs are correct that many of the cases cited by the District involved
routine IDEA matters, and thus, a 75% Laffey rate was deemed appropriate in that context. See,
e.g., Snead, 139 F. Supp. 3d at 381 (involving an “unremarkable IDEA administrative
representation”); Joaquin v. Friendship Pub. Charter Sch., 2016 WL 3034151, at *14 (D.D.C.
May 27, 2016) (case was not “unusually complex”); Platt v. Dist. of Columbia, 2016 WL
912171, at *11 (D.D.C. Mar. 7, 2016) (quoting Blackman v. Dist. Of Columbia, 56 F. Supp 3d
19, 29 (D.D.C. 2014)) (case involved “no ‘novel questions of law,’ burdensome discovery issues,
or other unusual complexities”); McAllister v. Dist. of Columbia, 21 F. Supp. 3d 94, 109 (D.D.C.
2014) (finding lack of complexity in cases where, inter alia, school district either defaulted or
failed to contest issues, no administrative hearing was conducted due to settlement, or hearing
had limited number of witnesses).
Here, in contrast, the parties engaged in a two-day hearing with ten witnesses and sixtyeight exhibits, resulting in the creation of a 1,300 page administrative record. (See Pls.’ Reply
Br. at 11; Administrative Record [ECF Nos. 12-13].) The case involved a challenging question
6
of statutory interpretation that was a matter of first impression in this district, which arose from
an apparent drafting error in the 2004 amendment of the IDEA. See Damarcus S., 2016 WL
2993158, at *4; see also Blackman, 56 F. Supp. 3d at 25 (“novel or complicated questions of
law” indicate complexity). The District discounts that complexity when it chides plaintiffs for
“[m]erely summarizing the reasoning of” G.L. v. Ligonier Valley School District Authority, 802
F.3d 601 (3d Cir. 2015), which this Court ultimately adopted. (See Def.’s Opp’n Br. at 8.) But
the statutory issue was apparently complex enough that both parties here actually reversed the
positions they took below. (See Def.’s Cross-Mot. for Summ. J. [ECF No. 16] at 13 n.6.)
Furthermore, the issue of how to properly evaluate Damarcus’s disability—whether to use a FullScale IQ or General Ability Index—was complicated, something the Court’s Memorandum
Opinion expressly noted. See Damarcus S., 2016 WL 2993158, at *8 (“When considering an
issue of such complexity . . . .”). Put simply, this was not a run-of-the-mill IDEA proceeding,
and therefore, the Court finds that rates falling between 75% and 100% of Laffey / USAO Matrix
rates are reasonable.
This raises the question of which rates should serve as the appropriate point of
comparison: the current USAO rates, or the rates that applied in the years that the work was
actually performed. As noted, plaintiffs’ requested rates range from 71% to 85% of the current
USAO rates; however, when using the lower 2013-14 Laffey rates4 as a point of comparison,
those relative percentages rise to 84% to 110%. (See Ex. A to Pls.’ Mot.; Ex. B to Pls.’ Mot.
(billing out Attorney MEG (25 years) at $430/hour, where full Laffey rate was $510/ hour;
billing out Attorney CEM (2 years) at $275/hour, where full Laffey rate was $250/hour). In other
4
See Laffey Matrix – 2013 – 2014, https://www.justice.gov/sites/default/files/usaodc/legacy/2013/09/09/Laffey_Matrix%202014.pdf.
7
words, plaintiffs seek rates for previous years’ work that occasionally exceed the Laffey rates that
applied in those years, even though they all fall below the USAO Matrix rates.
The District argues that historical Laffey rates should apply (Def.’s Opp’n Br. at 10-11),
and plaintiffs respond that the D.C. Circuit has sanctioned the application of current rates, as a
means of accounting for the delay in receiving payment, (Pls.’ Reply Br. at 14 (citing West v.
Potter, 717 F.3d 1030, 1034 (D.C. Cir. 2013).) West was a Title VII case, a fact that was
expressly relevant to the result in that case. See 717 F.3d at 1034. West also notes that there is a
“strong presumption” in favor of the application of historical rates. Id.; see also JacksonJohnson v. Dist. of Columbia, 2016 WL 1267153, at *3 (D.D.C. Mar. 31, 2016) (applying
historical rates); Reed v. Dist. of Columbia, 134 F. Supp. 3d 122, 137 (D.D.C. 2015) (same).
There was no unusual delay in this three-year IDEA case, no dilatory conduct on the part of the
District, and as noted, the rates requested by plaintiffs are more reasonable in comparison to
recent years’ Matrix rates than to those prior years’ rates. See West, 717 F.3d at 240 (appropriate
to apply historical rates if delay in payment was brief, or if rates sought by plaintiffs incorporate
compensation for delayed payment). The Court thus deems it appropriate to compare plaintiffs’
requested rates to those in effect at the time the work was performed. As discussed, plaintiffs are
entitled to attorneys’ rates that fall between 75%-100% of Laffey / USAO Matrix rates, so if an
attorney’s requested rate exceeds the Laffey or USAO Matrix rate for that year, it shall be capped
at the lower rate. (See, e.g., Ex. A to Pls.’ Mot. (showing that Attorney CEM’s requested rate
exceeds the full Laffey rate from 2012-13 to 2014-15, and that Attorney HMH’s requested rate
exceeds the full Laffey rate in 2012-13 and 2013-14).)
One final note on rates: the above analysis has focused only on attorneys’ rates, not on
those sought for paralegals and legal assistants. Here, plaintiffs seek rates that exceed the current
8
USAO rate for their legal assistants and paralegals, and significantly exceed the current USAO
rate for two senior paralegals. (See Pls.’ Mot. at 8 n.4.) They argue that the extensive
experience of their senior paralegals justifies their rates—which are 20% higher than the full
USAO rate—and that their “knowledge and expertise play a vital role in the continued success
and growth” of the law firm. (See id.) However, the analysis here involves a comparison to
prevailing rates in the community, based on the type of services provided. See 20 U.S.C. §
1415(i)(3)(C). The only relevant evidence that plaintiffs themselves offer (i.e., the 2015-16
USAO Matrix) demonstrates that they seek far more for their senior paralegals than the
prevailing community rate. (See Ex. C to Pls.’ Mot. at 1 (taking no account of paralegals’ level
of experience).) Plaintiffs do not suggest that these paralegals did more complex work than
paralegals working on similar IDEA cases, such that an upward departure might be justified.
Nor do they offer any explanation as to why their other paralegals and legal assistants should be
entitled to rates that exceed the USAO Matrix. Therefore, the Court will award plaintiffs’ senior
paralegals 85% of the USAO Matrix rate ($131/hour), and their remaining paralegals and legal
assistants 75% of the USAO rate ($116/hour).
These rates are commensurate to the rates awarded to plaintiffs’ attorneys, which ranged
from 71% to 85% of the current USAO rates. They also fall below the historical Laffey rates for
previous years’ work, so they are reasonably applied throughout the course of this litigation.
II. LIMITED SUCCESS
The District next argues that plaintiffs’ fee request should be reduced 20% to reflect their
limited success in this litigation. (See Def.’s Opp’n Br. at 11-14.) Plaintiffs in turn propose a
10% reduction on that basis. (See Pls.’ Reply Br. at 18.) The parties thus agree on the
underlying legal principle—that, because plaintiffs’ various claims are interrelated, it is
9
impossible to separate out the work done on unsuccessful claims, and so the Court must “simply
reduce the award to account for the limited success.” See Hensley v. Eckerhart, 461 U.S. 424,
436–37 (1983).
As the District concedes, plaintiffs “received much of the relief they sought.” (See Def.’s
Opp’n Br. at 14.) Although the Hearing Officer must still determine the precise amount of
compensatory education that Damarcus will receive, it is beyond dispute that the award will be
significant: not only was the existing behavioral award of 50 hours deemed insufficient, but
Damarcus will also receive compensatory hours for the District’s failure to respond to his
academic difficulties, and for drastically cutting his speech-language pathology hours despite
those difficulties. See Damarcus S., 2016 WL 2993158, at *12-*15. These were both serious
failures. The Court’s statute-of-limitations ruling also makes it possible that he will receive
additional relief on remand for alleged violations that the Hearing Officer erroneously deemed
time-barred. See id. at *6. On the other side of the scale, the claims that the Court rejected were
less significant—if plaintiffs had succeeded on those claims, they would have received far less
relief. See, e.g., id. at *9-*10 (plaintiffs’ claims regarding IEP baselines, IEP goals, and
specificity of IEPs, even if theoretically plausible, failed because they caused no injury); id. at
*16 (if successful, plaintiffs’ Rehabilitation Act claim would only have entitled them to expert
witness fees). Therefore, in light of the fact that plaintiffs received a substantial majority of the
relief they sought, the Court finds that a 15% reduction of the total fee award is appropriate.
III. BILLING PRACTICES
The District takes issue with three billing practices reflected in plaintiffs’ invoice,
arguing that the use of these practices warrants a further 25% reduction of the total fee award.
(Def.’s Opp’n Br. at 14-17.)
10
First, it asserts that plaintiffs’ invoice calculates time to the eighth of an hour, rather than
“the industry-norm of billing to the tenth of an hour,” resulting in a less accurate bill. (Id. at 15.)
It is certainly true that the award may “be reduced to account for any inaccuracies and
overbilling that may have occurred as a result of [plaintiffs’] unacceptable timekeeping habits.”
See Citizens for Responsibility & Ethics in Washington v. U.S. DOJ, 825 F. Supp. 2d 226, 231
(D.D.C. 2011) (citing Berkeley v. Home Ins. Co., 68 F.3d 1409, 1419–20 (D.C.Cir.1995)).
However, the only cases cited by the District involved courts’ disapproval of billing to quarterhour increments. See, e.g., Am. Civil Liberties Union v. U.S. DHS, 810 F. Supp. 2d 267, 278–79
(D.D.C. 2011); A.C. ex rel. Clark v. Dist. of Columbia, 674 F. Supp. 2d 149, 157 (D.D.C. 2009);
Blackman v. Dist. of Columbia, 59 F. Supp. 2d 37, 44 n.5 (D.D.C. 1999), abrogated on other
grounds by Buckhannon Bd. & Care Home, Inc. v. W. Va. Dep’t of Health & Human Res., 532
U.S. 598, 610 (2001). Nor has the Court located any cases in which billing to the eighth of an
hour has been disapproved. In fact, courts in this district have expressly approved billing to the
sixth of an hour. See Citizens for Responsibility & Ethics in Washington v. U.S. DOJ, 142 F.
Supp. 3d 1, 10 (D.D.C. 2015); see also Citizens for Responsibility & Ethics in Washington v.
FEC, 66 F. Supp. 3d 134, 150 (D.D.C. 2014) (noting “a preference for time records that are, at
most, in quarter-hour increments”). Thus, there is simply no basis to argue that plaintiffs’ billing
to the eighth of an hour is improper.
Second, the District argues that rounding errors have inflated plaintiffs’ invoice. (Def.’s
Opp’n Br. at 15-16.) In particular, it points out that plaintiffs’ invoice reflects a total of 621.11
hours worked, when in reality it should be 618.125. (Id.) This “total hours” figure was not used
to calculate the total fee request, and therefore it is wholly irrelevant. Plaintiffs arrived at their
fee request by multiplying each individual time entry by the appropriate rate—which the District
11
acknowledges they did correctly (id. at 15)—and then they added the correct individual amounts
together. (See Ex. A to Pls.’ Mot.) It would have been impossible to calculate the total fee
request using the total hours figure, because each attorney charged a different rate and thus the
multiplier would have varied. As a result, no purported rounding errors affected plaintiffs’ total
fee request.5
Finally, plaintiffs assert that a reduction is warranted due to the invoice’s inappropriate
use of block billing. (See Def.’s Opp’n Br. at 16-17.) Block billing involves lumping multiple
tasks into a single time entry, which can “mak[e] it impossible to evaluate their reasonableness.”
Role Models Am., Inc. v. Brownlee, 353 F.3d 962, 971 (D.C. Cir. 2004). There is no question
that plaintiffs’ invoice is completely block-billed throughout—it groups all tasks performed by
each attorney into a single daily time entry. (See, e.g., Ex. A to Pls.’ Mot. at 49-50 (billing 2.75
hours on fifteen different tasks); id. at 104 (billing two hours on seven different tasks); id. at 119
(billing 7.5 hours on four different tasks); id. at 119-20 (billing 7.875 hours on eight different
tasks).) Plaintiffs do not dispute this, but they argue that “there is no prohibition in this Circuit
on ‘block billing’ and the use of this practice does not result in a fee reduction where the
descriptions within the time entries are otherwise sufficiently detailed and reasonable.” (See
Pls.’ Reply Br. at 20.) They also state that block billing is the result of the computer program
used by McAndrews Law Offices, arguing that this practice is more efficient. (Id. at 22.)
5
The District also goes to the trouble of asserting an overage of $2.135, which it apparently
arrived at by adding fractions of pennies that plaintiffs rounded up. (See Def.’s Opp’n Br. at 16
n.8.) Even if the District had adequately shown how it reached that figure, the Court is
concerned with determining a reasonable overall award, not with fractions of pennies that add up
to less than the price of a cup of coffee. Cf. Sandifer v. U.S. Steel Corp., 134 S. Ct. 870, 880
(2014) (discussing the doctrine of “de minimis non curat lex (the law does not take account of
trifles)”).
12
Plaintiffs’ efforts to defend block billing are unpersuasive, particularly considering that
they bear the burden of justifying their fee request. See Covington, 57 F.3d at 1107. Although it
is of course true that block billing is not “prohibit[ed],” it is also true that courts often reduce fee
awards as a result of it. See, e.g., Role Models Am., Inc., 353 F.3d at 971; Bennett v. Castro, 74
F. Supp. 3d 382, 406 (D.D.C. 2014); In re InPhonic, Inc., 674 F. Supp. 2d 273, 289 (D.D.C.
2009); Summers v. Howard Univ., 2006 WL 751316, at *7 (D.D.C. Mar. 20, 2006). The reason
for this is obvious: even if tasks are adequately described, there is simply no way for the Court to
assess whether the time spent on each of those tasks was reasonable. See Role Models Am., Inc.,
353 F.3d at 970 (quoting In re Olson, 884 F.2d 1415, 1428 (D.C. Cir. 1989) (court must
“determine with a high degree of certainty that such hours were actually and reasonably
expended”). Where the number of tasks and blocks of time are small, the risk of inaccuracy is
also small—if an attorney spends a half-hour emailing opposing counsel and reviewing her
response, the Court can be reasonably assured that the time spent was justified. However, if the
attorney spends 10.8 hours researching standing, emailing co-counsel, revising a brief, and
teleconferencing with the client, the Court lacks that same assurance. Did the research take nine
hours? Was it a four-hour teleconference? The Court has no idea.
By the same token, the efficiency of block billing is irrelevant, as is the type of computer
system used by plaintiffs’ firm—even if plaintiffs’ attorneys might benefit from block billing, the
Court is concerned here only with their ability to justify their fee request. This particular invoice
fails to adequately do that. If it had relied on block billing infrequently, a reduction might not be
warranted, see Fitts v. Unum Life Ins. Co. of Am., 680 F. Supp. 2d 38, 42 (D.D.C. 2010)
(declining a reduction where only a “relatively small fraction” of entries were block-billed), but
13
this entire invoice here is block-billed. As a result, the Court will reduce plaintiffs’ total award
by an additional 5%.
IV. NON-COMPENSABLE TIME
The District takes issue with numerous entries that it argues are either wholly noncompensable or improperly billed: time related to resolution sessions meetings (RSMs); time
spent on plaintiffs’ earlier administrative complaints, which they voluntarily withdrew; attorney
travel time; and time that the District alleges is related to plaintiffs’ ongoing concerns rather than
the instant litigation.
A. Resolution Session Meetings
The District argues that plaintiffs should not be reimbursed for time spent preparing for,
or participating in, RSMs. (See Def.’s Opp’n Br. at 17-19 (quoting 20 U.S.C.
§ 1415(i)(3)(D)(iii) (“A meeting conducted pursuant to subsection (f)(1)(B)(i) shall not be
considered a meeting convened as a result of an administrative hearing or judicial action or an
administrative hearing or judicial action for purposes of [20 U.S.C. § 1415(i)(3)].”)).) In
response, plaintiffs have agreed to withdraw their request for time spent participating in the
RSMs, but they insist that time spent preparing for those sessions is fully compensable. (See
Pls.’ Reply Br. at 23-24.)
Section 1415(i)(3)(D)(iii), when read in context with other provisions in that section,
prohibits any award for time spent preparing for an RSM. See Howard v. Achievement
Preparatory Acad. Pub. Charter Sch., 2016 WL 1212409, at *14 (D.D.C. Mar. 8, 2016);
Brandon E. v. Dep’t of Educ., 2008 WL 4602533, at *7 (D. Haw. Oct. 16, 2008); see also Mars
Area Sch. Dist. v. C. L., 2015 WL 8207463, at *6 n.5 (W.D. Pa. Dec. 7, 2015) (citing cases)
(noting that it is “well-established” that fees related to RSMs are non-compensable). First, an
14
RSM is a meeting of the IEP team. See 20 U.S.C. § 1415(f)(1)(B)(i) (defining an RSM as “a
meeting with the parents and the relevant member or members of the IEP Team”). Next, an
award of attorney’s fees is prohibited if it “relat[es] to any meeting of the IEP team unless such
meeting is convened as a result of an administrative proceeding or judicial action.” See id.
§ 1415(i)(3)(D)(ii). Thus, time spent preparing for an RSM—which “relat[es] to [a] meeting of
the IEP Team”—would only be compensable if the exception applies, i.e., if the RSM was
“convened as a result of an administrative proceeding or judicial action.” See id. However, the
very next provision makes clear that this exception does not apply to an RSM, which “shall not
be considered . . . a meeting convened as a result of an administrative hearing or judicial action.”
See id. § 1415(i)(3)(D)(iii)(I).
The Court recognizes that this issue is not entirely clear-cut. See Y.B. v. Williamson Cty.
Bd. of Educ., 2009 WL 4061311, at *25 (M.D. Tenn. Nov. 20, 2009). Even acknowledging the
minor statutory inconsistency—Section 1415(i)(3)(D)(ii) uses the phrase “convened as a result of
an administrative proceeding,” while Section 1415(i)(3)(D)(iii) says “convened as a result of an
administrative hearing”—the Court concludes that it is simply a result of imprecise drafting. Cf.
G.L. v. Ligonier Valley School District Authority, 802 F.3d 601, 624 (3d Cir. 2015) (finding that
an inconsistency in another part of Section 1415 was the result of a drafting error). The
linguistic structure of the exception in (D)(ii) is otherwise identical to the structure in (D)(iii),
giving rise to a strong inference that the two provisions were meant to be read in tandem. After
all, standing alone, the RSM provision in (D)(iii) has no apparent effect—it is only given
meaning if an RSM is an IEP meeting for which attorneys cannot recover for. There is simply
no other way to explain its presence in a subsection entitled “Prohibition of attorneys’ fees and
related costs for certain services.” See 20 U.S.C. § 1415(i)(3)(D)(iii).
15
Therefore, plaintiffs’ request for RSM preparation fees is denied.6
B. Time Spent on “Earlier Cases”
In May 2013 and January 2014, plaintiffs filed and later voluntarily withdrew two
administrative complaints against the District, prior to the December 2014 filing of the complaint
at issue here. See Damarcus S., 2016 WL 2993158, at *2 (D.D.C. May 23, 2016). As the Court
previously noted, the May 2013 complaint raised “basically the same issues” as those raised
here, while the January 2014 complaint sought an independent evaluation for which plaintiffs
were ultimately awarded reimbursement here. Id. at *2, *15. The District argues that plaintiffs
are not entitled to any reimbursement for work done prior to November 6, 2014, because that
work related to “earlier cases” in which plaintiffs were not the prevailing party. (See Def.’s
Opp’n Br. at 19-20.) Plaintiffs respond that these do not represent different cases at all, but
instead are intertwined with the current litigation, such that full reimbursement is appropriate.
(See Pls.’ Reply Br. at 24-25.)
Although the District is correct that plaintiffs were not prevailing parties in their earlier
complaints, that is not the relevant issue here. The issue is whether the work performed prior to
November 6, 2014 is reasonably compensable as a result of their success in this litigation. See
20 U.S.C. § 1415 (i)(3)(b)(i). The District does not dispute the interrelatedness of the issues
raised in the withdrawn complaints and those raised here, nor could it. Thus, there is no question
that much of that earlier work contributed to plaintiffs’ success in this litigation, and as a result,
the District’s argument for a full reduction fails. Nevertheless, the Court finds that plaintiffs are
6
Plaintiffs note that their RSM preparation fees are block billed together with unrelated,
compensable fees. (See Pls.’ Reply Br. at 24.) This is yet another drawback of block billing. See
Role Models Am., Inc., 353 F.3d at 971. The Court will thus approximate the amount of time in
those block entries that remain compensable and award only those fees.
16
not entitled to full reimbursement, given that the withdrawal of those complaints prolonged the
overall litigation by roughly nineteen months. Despite plaintiffs’ argument that “[a]ll of the
work that went into the initial Due Process complaints was directly relevant to this litigation”
(Pls.’ Reply. Br. at 25), there is no question that this nineteen-month delay created much
additional work, even if it was technically “relevant” to this litigation. (See, e.g., Ex. A to Pls.’
Mot. at 23 (charges for preparation of second complaint); id. at 26 (charges related to Prehearing
Conference that was later rendered unnecessary by withdrawal).) To account for this selfimposed delay, which is not reasonably charged to the District, the Court will reduce plaintiffs’
pre-November 6, 2014 award by 20%.
C. Attorney Travel Time
Plaintiffs concede that their fee request improperly bills attorney travel time at a full rate,
as opposed to the proper 50% rate. (See Pls.’ Reply Br. at 25; see also McAllister v. Dist. of
Columbia, 21 F. Supp. 3d 94, 106 (D.D.C. 2014) (“[I]n this Circuit, travel time is compensated at
half of the attorney’s rate.”). Plaintiffs’ award will be reduced accordingly.
D. Unrelated Time
The District challenges numerous charges incurred after February 17, 2016, which it
argues are unrelated to the instant litigation and therefore non-compensable. (See Def.’s Opp’n
Br. at 22-23 & Table 3.) Plaintiffs argue that these entries are clearly related, because they
concern
(a) counsel’s efforts to implement the Hearing Officer’s and this Court’s award of
compensatory education, including through communications with counsel for the
District; (b) preparation for the upcoming Due Process hearing on remand ordered
by this Court; (c) efforts to settle the instant litigation; or (d) the instant federal
court proceedings.
17
(Pls.’ Reply Br. at 27.)
Time entries that fall into the latter two categories are compensable at the rates already
approved by the Court. However, the Court’s determination of reasonable rates took into
account only the complexity of the litigation to the point of judgment (i.e., May 23, 2016), and
those are not directly applicable to the former two categories. The Court is not inclined to
address in piecemeal fashion the fees performed on remand and in implementing relief: the
process is still ongoing, and, at this juncture, the Court cannot determine the complexity of the
legal work involved.
Moreover, the invoice plainly reflects that certain entries fall outside of the four
categories listed by plaintiffs, and thus, they are not compensable. It is unclear, for instance,
how work related to future IEP meetings; Damarcus’s current mental health and residence;
“alerts;” “Department of Revenue check[s];” or Damarcus’s current IEP, FBA, evaluations, or
medical referrals have anything to do with this litigation. (See Ex. A to Pls.’ Mot. at 96-118.)
Again, these non-compensable entries have been block-billed with compensable entries.
Therefore, as with the time plaintiffs claimed for RSMs, the Court will approximate the
necessary reduction of each blocked entry.
V. OVER-STAFFING
Finally, in one short paragraph, the District argues that plaintiffs overstaffed the case.
(See Def.’s Opp’n Br. at 21.) It notes that five senior attorneys and three junior attorneys worked
on the case over the course of the litigation, and that at times “two professionals perform[ed] the
same task.” (Id. at 21 & n.14.) However, a look at the “duplicative” entries flagged by the
District reveals nothing improper. For instance, on June 11, 2014, the task that two professionals
performed was communicating with one another. (See Ex. A to Pls.’ Mot. at 34.) Of course,
18
both attorneys could properly bill for that time. And regardless of the total number of attorneys
that touched the case, the invoice reflects that a single attorney was responsible for the majority
of charges at any one point in time, something the District itself acknowledges. (See Def.’s
Opp’n Br. at 21 n.15.) The District’s argument for a reduction on this basis is not well-taken.
CONCLUSION
Accordingly, plaintiffs’ motion for attorney’s fees is GRANTED IN PART and
DENIED IN PART. A separate Order accompanies this Memorandum Opinion.
/s/ Ellen Segal Huvelle
ELLEN SEGAL HUVELLE
United States District Judge
Date: August 30, 2016
19
01/14/13 JH
Telephone communication with
client
01/16/13 DCM Review of Intake
185.00
131.00
23.13
13.10
N
ot
es
ar
d
A
w
A
dj
us
te
d
Fe
eC
re
di
te
d
ed
16.38
Rate reduced to 85%
USAO; Fee reduced by
20% (Pre-11/6/14)
0.125
0.125
185.00
131.00
23.13
16.38
13.10
0.125
0.125
450.00
450.00
56.25
56.25
45.00
Rate reduced to 85%
USAO; Fee reduced by
20% (Pre-11/6/14)
Fee reduced 20% (Pre11/6/14)
65.50
Rate reduced to 85%
USAO; Fee reduced by
20% (Pre-11/6/14)
13.10
Rate reduced to 85%
USAO; Fee reduced by
20% (Pre-11/6/14)
24.50
Rate reduced to Laffey
(12-13); Fee reduced by
20% (Pre-11/6/14)
24.50
Rate reduced to Laffey
(12-13); Fee reduced by
20% (Pre-11/6/14)
01/16/13 JH
01/18/13 JH
Review of file materials
regarding School District records 0.125
Telephone communication with
D. Hodges
Preparation of memorandum to
01/31/13 CEM file
0.125
Fe
eC
la
im
H
0.125
Preparation of Intake
Preparation of correspondence to
client
0.625
Telephone communication with
01/24/13 CEM client regarding records
Civil Action No. 15‐851 (ESH)
ed
H
ou
rs
C
re
di
te
d
R
at
eC
la
im
ed
R
at
eC
re
di
te
d
Pe
k
W
or
01/09/13 JH
Telephone communication with
client
Page 1 of 104
ou
rs
C
la
im
or
m
ed
rf
ls
In
iti
a
D
at
e
Attachment to Mem. Op. [ECF No. 30]
0.125
0.125
Telephone communication with
02/01/13 CEM client
0.125
Review of correspondence from
02/06/13 HBK D. Hodges
0.125
0.625
0.125
0.125
0.125
185.00
185.00
275.00
275.00
131.00
131.00
245.00
245.00
115.63
23.13
34.38
34.38
81.88
16.38
30.63
30.63
0.125
275.00
245.00
34.38
30.63
24.50
0.125
430.00
430.00
53.75
53.75
43.00
Rate reduced to Laffey
(12-13); Fee reduced by
20% (Pre-11/6/14)
Fee reduced 20% (Pre11/6/14)
0.375
0.375
275.00
245.00
103.13
91.88
73.50
Rate reduced to Laffey
(12-13); Fee reduced by
20% (Pre-11/6/14)
Review of file
materials/Interoffice
communication regarding police
02/07/13 HBK charges and status
0.375
0.375
430.00
430.00
161.25
161.25
129.00
Fee reduced 20% (Pre11/6/14)
122.50
Rate reduced to Laffey
(12-13); Fee reduced by
20% (Pre-11/6/14)
24.50
Rate reduced to Laffey
(12-13); Fee reduced by
20% (Pre-11/6/14)
49.00
Rate reduced to Laffey
(12-13); Fee reduced by
20% (Pre-11/6/14)
02/06/13 CEM Review of records
Telephone communications with
client
Review of records
Preparation of correspondence to
0.625
02/07/13 CEM D. Hodges
Interoffice communication with
M. Buczkowski regarding
02/12/13 CEM discipline
0.125
Telephone communication with
02/21/13 CEM client regarding discipline issues 0.250
0.625
0.125
0.250
275.00
275.00
275.00
245.00
245.00
245.00
171.88
34.38
68.75
153.13
30.63
61.25
Review of file materials
Update case status
Preparation of correspondence to
D. Hodges regarding IEP
03/02/13 CEM Meeting
0.125
Telephone communication with
D. Hodges regarding job and
03/08/13 CEM services
03/14/13 CEM Preparation of File Review
03/15/13 JH
Telephone communication with
client
Interoffice communication with
J. Hardy regarding scheduling
03/15/13 CEM Initial client meeting
Review of records
Preparation for, travel to and
attendance at initial client
03/15/13 HBK meeting
0.125
0.125
0.500
0.125
0.750
3.625
0.250
0.125
0.125
0.125
0.500
0.125
0.750
3.250
275.00
275.00
275.00
275.00
275.00
185.00
275.00
430.00
245.00
245.00
245.00
245.00
245.00
131.00
245.00
430.00
68.75
34.38
34.38
34.38
137.50
23.13
206.25
1,558.75
61.25
30.63
30.63
30.63
122.50
16.38
183.75
1,397.50
N
ot
es
ar
d
A
w
A
dj
us
te
d
Fe
eC
re
di
te
d
Fe
eC
la
im
ed
Civil Action No. 15‐851 (ESH)
ed
H
ou
rs
C
re
di
te
d
R
at
eC
la
im
ed
R
at
eC
re
di
te
d
H
Telephone communication with
D. Hodges regarding IEP
meeting and need for evaluation
Interoffice communication with
H.B. Konkler-Goldsmith
03/01/13 CEM regarding IEP meeting
0.250
Telephone communication with
D. Hodges regarding IEP and
03/04/13 CEM evaluation
Page 2 of 104
ou
rs
C
la
im
or
m
ed
W
or
k
Pe
rf
ls
In
iti
a
D
at
e
Attachment to Mem. Op. [ECF No. 30]
49.00
Rate reduced to Laffey
(12-13); Fee reduced by
20% (Pre-11/6/14)
24.50
Rate reduced to Laffey
(12-13); Fee reduced by
20% (Pre-11/6/14)
24.50
Rate reduced to Laffey
(12-13); Fee reduced by
20% (Pre-11/6/14)
24.50
Rate reduced to Laffey
(12-13); Fee reduced by
20% (Pre-11/6/14)
98.00
Rate reduced to Laffey
(12-13); Fee reduced by
20% (Pre-11/6/14)
13.10
Rate reduced to 85%
USAO; Fee reduced by
20% (Pre-11/6/14)
147.00
Rate reduced to Laffey
(12-13); Fee reduced by
20% (Pre-11/6/14)
1,118.00
Hours reduced (travel);
Fee reduced 20% (Pre11/6/14)
Preparation of correspondence to
03/25/13 CEM client regarding representation
0.125
0.125
275.00
245.00
34.38
30.63
24.50
Rate reduced to Laffey
(12-13); Fee reduced by
20% (Pre-11/6/14)
Interoffice communication with
C. McAndrews and M.
Buczkowski regarding
representation and Due Process
03/26/13 HBK Complaint
0.125
430.00
430.00
53.75
53.75
43.00
Fee reduced 20% (Pre11/6/14)
49.00
Rate reduced to Laffey
(12-13); Fee reduced by
20% (Pre-11/6/14)
34.80
Rate reduced to 75%
USAO; Fee reduced by
20% (Pre-11/6/14)
0.125
Preparation of correspondence to
client regarding representation
Interoffice communication with
H.B. Konkler-Goldsmith and M.
Buczkowski regarding same and
0.250
03/26/13 CEM Due Process Complaint
03/27/13 MM
Preparation of File Chronology
0.375
0.250
0.375
275.00
140.00
245.00
116.00
68.75
52.50
61.25
43.50
Review of file
materials/Interoffice
communication regarding Due
04/03/13 HBK Process Request
0.250
430.00
430.00
107.50
107.50
N
ot
es
ar
d
A
w
A
dj
us
te
d
Fe
eC
re
di
te
d
Fe
eC
la
im
H
0.250
ed
Civil Action No. 15‐851 (ESH)
ed
H
ou
rs
C
re
di
te
d
R
at
eC
la
im
ed
R
at
eC
re
di
te
d
Page 3 of 104
ou
rs
C
la
im
or
m
ed
W
or
k
Pe
rf
ls
In
iti
a
D
at
e
Attachment to Mem. Op. [ECF No. 30]
86.00
Fee reduced 20% (Pre11/6/14)
Preparation of correspondence to
counsel, M. Hobson, regarding
update and Due Process
Complaint
Review of records
Preparation of Due Process
04/05/13 CEM Complaint
5.125
5.125
275.00
245.00
1,409.38
1,255.63
1,004.50
Rate reduced to Laffey
(12-13); Fee reduced by
20% (Pre-11/6/14)
Interoffice communication with
C. McAndrews regarding Due
04/08/13 HBK Process Complaint
0.250
430.00
430.00
107.50
107.50
86.00
Fee reduced 20% (Pre11/6/14)
11.60
Rate reduced to 75%
USAO; Fee reduced by
20% (Pre-11/6/14)
04/08/13 MM
Telephone communication with
client
0.250
0.125
0.125
140.00
116.00
17.50
14.50
Interoffice communication with
M. Buczkowski regarding
representation
Interoffice communication with
H.B. Konkler-Goldsmith
regarding Due Process
04/08/13 CEM Complaint
0.375
0.375
275.00
245.00
103.13
91.88
73.50
Rate reduced to Laffey
(12-13); Fee reduced by
20% (Pre-11/6/14)
Review of file
materials/Interoffice
communication regarding Due
04/09/13 HBK Process Request
0.125
0.125
430.00
430.00
53.75
53.75
43.00
Fee reduced 20% (Pre11/6/14)
11.60
Rate reduced to 75%
USAO; Fee reduced by
20% (Pre-11/6/14)
26.20
Rate reduced to 85%
USAO; Fee reduced by
20% (Pre-11/6/14)
73.50
Rate reduced to Laffey
(12-13); Fee reduced by
20% (Pre-11/6/14)
24.50
Rate reduced to Laffey
(12-13); Fee reduced by
20% (Pre-11/6/14)
98.00
Rate reduced to Laffey
(12-13); Fee reduced by
20% (Pre-11/6/14)
04/09/13 MM
Review of correspondence from
client
0.125
04/09/13 JH
Review of file materials
regarding representation and
Releases
0.250
Interoffice communication with
H.B. Konkler-Goldsmith
regarding representation and Due
Process Complaint
Interoffice communication with
M. Buczkowski regarding
0.375
04/09/13 CEM meeting and representation
Preparation of correspondence to
counsel, M. Hobson regarding
04/15/13 CEM Due Process Complaint
0.125
Review and revise Due Process
04/22/13 CEM Complaint
0.500
0.125
0.250
0.375
0.125
0.500
140.00
185.00
275.00
275.00
275.00
116.00
131.00
245.00
245.00
245.00
17.50
46.25
103.13
34.38
137.50
14.50
32.75
91.88
30.63
122.50
N
ot
es
ar
d
A
w
A
dj
us
te
d
Fe
eC
re
di
te
d
Fe
eC
la
im
H
ed
Civil Action No. 15‐851 (ESH)
ed
H
ou
rs
C
re
di
te
d
R
at
eC
la
im
ed
R
at
eC
re
di
te
d
Page 4 of 104
ou
rs
C
la
im
or
m
ed
W
or
k
Pe
rf
ls
In
iti
a
D
at
e
Attachment to Mem. Op. [ECF No. 30]
Review of sample Due Process
Complaint
Interoffice communication with
H.B. Konkler-Goldsmith
regarding Due Process
04/23/13 CEM Complaint
0.250
0.250
275.00
245.00
68.75
61.25
49.00
Rate reduced to Laffey
(12-13); Fee reduced by
20% (Pre-11/6/14)
Interoffice communication with
C. McAndrews regarding Due
04/25/13 HBK Process Complaint
0.125
0.125
430.00
430.00
53.75
53.75
43.00
Fee reduced 20% (Pre11/6/14)
24.50
Rate reduced to Laffey
(12-13); Fee reduced by
20% (Pre-11/6/14)
24.50
Rate reduced to Laffey
(12-13); Fee reduced by
20% (Pre-11/6/14)
49.00
Rate reduced to Laffey
(12-13); Fee reduced by
20% (Pre-11/6/14)
Interoffice communication with
H.B. Konkler-Goldsmith
regarding Due Process
04/25/13 CEM Complaint format
Interoffice communication with
M. Hobson regarding Due
04/26/13 CEM Process Complaint
Interoffice communication with
H.B. Konkler-Goldsmith
regarding Due Process
04/30/13 CEM Complaint
0.125
0.125
0.250
0.125
0.125
0.250
275.00
275.00
275.00
245.00
245.00
245.00
34.38
34.38
68.75
30.63
30.63
61.25
Telephone communication with
D. Hodges regarding Due
05/05/13 CEM Process Complaint
0.125
0.125
275.00
245.00
34.38
30.63
24.50
Rate reduced to Laffey
(12-13); Fee reduced by
20% (Pre-11/6/14)
Review of file
materials/Interoffice
communication regarding
05/06/13 HBK records
0.250
0.250
430.00
430.00
107.50
107.50
86.00
Fee reduced 20% (Pre11/6/14)
24.50
Rate reduced to Laffey
(12-13); Fee reduced by
20% (Pre-11/6/14)
Telephone communication with
client regarding Due Process
05/06/13 CEM Complaint
Interoffice communication with
M. Buczkowski and F. Hobson
regarding Due Process
05/07/13 CEM Complaint
0.125
0.125
275.00
245.00
34.38
30.63
0.125
0.125
275.00
245.00
34.38
30.63
24.50
Rate reduced to Laffey
(12-13); Fee reduced by
20% (Pre-11/6/14)
Interoffice communication with
D.C. McAndrews, C.
McAndrews and M. Buczkowski
regarding Due Process
0.250
05/08/13 HBK Complaint
0.250
430.00
430.00
107.50
107.50
86.00
Fee reduced 20% (Pre11/6/14)
Review and revise Due Process
Complaint
Interoffice communication with
D.C. McAndrews, H.B. KonklerGoldsmith and M. Buczkowski
1.625
05/08/13 CEM regarding same
1.625
275.00
245.00
446.88
398.13
318.50
Rate reduced to Laffey
(12-13); Fee reduced by
20% (Pre-11/6/14)
Interoffice communication with
C. McAndrews regarding Due
05/09/13 HBK Process Complaint
0.125
430.00
430.00
53.75
53.75
43.00
Fee reduced 20% (Pre11/6/14)
294.00
Rate reduced to Laffey
(12-13); Fee reduced by
20% (Pre-11/6/14)
0.125
Interoffice communications with
H.B. Konkler-Goldsmith
regarding Due Process
Complaint
05/09/13 CEM Review and revise same
1.500
1.500
275.00
245.00
412.50
367.50
Interoffice communication with
H.B. Konkler-Goldsmith
regarding Due Process
05/10/13 CEM Complaint
Interoffice communication with
M. Hobson regarding Due
Process Complaint
Revise Due Process Complaint
Telephone communication with
D. Hodges regarding meeting
with school
Interoffice communication with
H.B. Konkler-Goldsmith
regarding same
Interoffice communication with
M. Buczkowski regarding
05/13/13 CEM meeting
05/16/13 MM
Telephone communication with
D. Hodges
1.375
0.125
0.125
0.125
1.375
0.875
0.125
0.125
275.00
275.00
275.00
275.00
140.00
245.00
245.00
245.00
245.00
116.00
34.38
378.13
240.63
34.38
17.50
30.63
336.88
214.38
30.63
14.50
N
ot
es
ar
d
A
w
A
dj
us
te
d
Fe
eC
re
di
te
d
Fe
eC
la
im
ed
Civil Action No. 15‐851 (ESH)
ed
H
ou
rs
C
re
di
te
d
R
at
eC
la
im
ed
R
at
eC
re
di
te
d
H
0.125
Interoffice communication with
H.B. Konkler-Goldsmith
regarding Due Process
Complaint
Interoffice communication with
M. Hobson regarding same
Preparation of Due Process
Complaint
Interoffice communications with
M. Buczkowski regarding same
and meeting
Review of correspondence from
0.875
05/14/13 CEM D. Hodges regarding meeting
Interoffice communication with
H.B. Konkler-Goldsmith
05/15/13 CEM regarding meeting
Page 5 of 104
ou
rs
C
la
im
or
m
ed
W
or
k
Pe
rf
ls
In
iti
a
D
at
e
Attachment to Mem. Op. [ECF No. 30]
24.50
Rate reduced to Laffey
(12-13); Fee reduced by
20% (Pre-11/6/14)
269.50
Rate reduced to Laffey
(12-13); Fee reduced by
20% (Pre-11/6/14)
171.50
Rate reduced to Laffey
(12-13); Fee reduced by
20% (Pre-11/6/14)
24.50
Rate reduced to Laffey
(12-13); Fee reduced by
20% (Pre-11/6/14)
11.60
Rate reduced to 75%
USAO; Fee reduced by
20% (Pre-11/6/14)
Preparation of Due Process
Complaint
Review of correspondence from
D. Hodges regarding meeting
Preparation of correspondence to
0.875
05/16/13 CEM D. Hodges regarding same
0.875
275.00
245.00
240.63
214.38
171.50
Rate reduced to Laffey
(12-13); Fee reduced by
20% (Pre-11/6/14)
Review of file
materials/Interoffice
communication regarding job
05/17/13 HBK placement
0.125
430.00
430.00
53.75
53.75
43.00
Fee reduced 20% (Pre11/6/14)
24.50
Rate reduced to Laffey
(12-13); Fee reduced by
20% (Pre-11/6/14)
Interoffice communication with
H.B. Konkler-Goldsmith
05/17/13 CEM regarding MDT meeting
0.125
0.125
0.125
275.00
245.00
34.38
30.63
Telephone communication with
D. Hodges regarding MDT
05/20/13 CEM meeting
0.125
275.00
245.00
34.38
30.63
N
ot
es
ar
d
A
w
A
dj
us
te
d
Fe
eC
re
di
te
d
Fe
eC
la
im
H
0.125
ed
Civil Action No. 15‐851 (ESH)
ed
H
ou
rs
C
re
di
te
d
R
at
eC
la
im
ed
R
at
eC
re
di
te
d
Page 6 of 104
ou
rs
C
la
im
or
m
ed
W
or
k
Pe
rf
ls
In
iti
a
D
at
e
Attachment to Mem. Op. [ECF No. 30]
24.50
Rate reduced to Laffey
(12-13); Fee reduced by
20% (Pre-11/6/14)
Review of correspondences from
Student Hearing Office
regarding Due Process Hearing
Review of correspondence from
counsel, M. Washington,
05/21/13 CEM regarding same
0.375
0.375
275.00
245.00
103.13
91.88
73.50
Rate reduced to Laffey
(12-13); Fee reduced by
20% (Pre-11/6/14)
Review of file
materials/Interoffice
communication regarding Due
Process
Telephone communication with
05/22/13 HBK counsel
0.750
430.00
430.00
322.50
322.50
258.00
Fee reduced 20% (Pre11/6/14)
23.20
Rate reduced to 75%
USAO; Fee reduced by
20% (Pre-11/6/14)
441.00
Rate reduced to Laffey
(12-13); Fee reduced by
20% (Pre-11/6/14)
23.20
Rate reduced to 75%
USAO; Fee reduced by
20% (Pre-11/6/14)
13.10
Rate reduced to 85%
USAO; Fee reduced by
20% (Pre-11/6/14)
05/22/13 MM
0.750
Telephone communications with
client
0.250
Review of correspondence from
Student Hearing Office
regarding scheduling
Telephone communication with
counsel
Interoffice communication with
H.B. Konkler-Goldsmith
regarding Due Process Hearing
and IEE
Interoffice communication with
M. Hobson regarding Due
Process Hearing
Interoffice communication with
M. Buczkowski regarding same
Telephone communication with
client
Preparation of correspondence to
Hearing Officer and M.
2.250
05/22/13 CEM Washington
05/23/13 MM
Review of correspondence from
Hearing Officer Massey
Telephone communication with
client
0.250
05/23/13 JH
Review of file materials
regarding Due Process
0.125
0.250
2.250
0.250
0.125
140.00
275.00
140.00
185.00
116.00
245.00
116.00
131.00
35.00
618.75
35.00
23.13
29.00
551.25
29.00
16.38
N
ot
es
ar
d
A
w
A
dj
us
te
d
Fe
eC
re
di
te
d
Fe
eC
la
im
H
ed
Civil Action No. 15‐851 (ESH)
ed
H
ou
rs
C
re
di
te
d
R
at
eC
la
im
ed
R
at
eC
re
di
te
d
Page 7 of 104
ou
rs
C
la
im
or
m
ed
W
or
k
Pe
rf
ls
In
iti
a
D
at
e
Attachment to Mem. Op. [ECF No. 30]
Interoffice communication with
M. Hobson regarding scheduling
Due Process Hearing
Interoffice communication with
M. Buczkowski and J. Hardy
regarding same
Interoffice communication with
H.B. Konkler-Goldsmith
regarding Due Process Hearing
Preparation of correspondence to
Student Hearing Office
Review of correspondence from
0.875
05/23/13 CEM Hearing Officer Massey
0.875
275.00
245.00
240.63
214.38
171.50
Rate reduced to Laffey
(12-13); Fee reduced by
20% (Pre-11/6/14)
Review of file
materials/Interoffice
communication regarding Due
05/24/13 HBK Process
0.250
430.00
430.00
107.50
107.50
86.00
Fee reduced 20% (Pre11/6/14)
0.00
Hours reduced (RSM);
Fee reduced 20% (Pre11/6/14)
220.50
Hours reduced (RSM);
Rate reduced to Laffey
(12-13); Fee reduced
20% (Pre-11/6/14)
0.00
Hours reduced (RSM);
Fee reduced 20% (Pre11/6/14)
Interoffice communication with
C. McAndrews regarding
05/28/13 HBK Resolution Session
0.250
0.125
Review of 2012 Jones ADR
Agreement
Review of correspondence from
counsel, M. Washington,
regarding Due Process Hearing
Interoffice communications with
H.B. Konkler-Goldsmith
regarding Resolution Session,
DCPS Response and records
Review of DCPS Response to
Due Process Complaint
Review of correspondence from
counsel regarding records
Telephone communication with
client regarding Resolution
Session
Preparation of correspondence to
C. Ahaghotu regarding same
Interoffice communication with
M. Hobson regarding School
1.625
05/28/13 CEM District negotiations
Interoffice communication with
C. McAndrews regarding
05/29/13 HBK Resolution Session
0.125
0.000
1.125
0.000
430.00
275.00
430.00
430.00
245.00
430.00
53.75
446.88
53.75
0.00
275.63
0.00
Interoffice communication with
H.B. Konkler-Goldsmith
regarding Resolution Session
and Records Request
Telephone communication with
C. Ahaghotu regarding
Resolution Session
Preparation of correspondence to
0.625
05/29/13 CEM counsel
Interoffice communication with
H.B. Konkler-Goldsmith
regarding Resolution Meeting
Preparation of correspondence to
05/31/13 CEM counsel
0.500
Telephone communication with
client
Preparation of correspondence to
C. Ahaghotu regarding
06/03/13 CEM Resolution Session
0.250
Review of file
materials/Interoffice
communication regarding
resolution
Review of correspondence from
06/04/13 HBK DCPS
0.500
Review of correspondence from
C. Ahaghotu regarding
Resolution Session
Preparation of correspondence to
C. Ahagotu regarding same
Interoffice communication with
H.B. Konkler-Goldsmith
regarding Resolution Session
Review of correspondence from
0.875
06/04/13 CEM D. Defino regarding same
Review of correspondence from
C. Ahaghotu regarding
Resolution Session
Preparation of correspondence to
C. Ahaghotu regarding same
Interoffice communication with
M. Buczkowski regarding
Resolution Session
Review of correspondence from
0.500
06/05/13 CEM counsel
0.000
0.000
0.000
0.000
0.000
275.00
275.00
275.00
430.00
275.00
275.00
245.00
245.00
250.00
430.00
250.00
250.00
171.88
137.50
68.75
215.00
240.63
137.50
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
N
ot
es
ar
d
A
w
A
dj
us
te
d
Fe
eC
re
di
te
d
Fe
eC
la
im
ou
rs
C
la
im
0.000
ed
Civil Action No. 15‐851 (ESH)
ed
H
ou
rs
C
re
di
te
d
R
at
eC
la
im
ed
R
at
eC
re
di
te
d
Page 8 of 104
H
or
m
ed
W
or
k
Pe
rf
ls
In
iti
a
D
at
e
Attachment to Mem. Op. [ECF No. 30]
0.00
Hours reduced (RSM);
Rate reduced to Laffey
(12-13); Fee reduced
20% (Pre-11/6/14)
0.00
Hours reduced (RSM);
Rate reduced to Laffey
(12-13); Fee reduced
20% (Pre-11/6/14)
0.00
Hours reduced (RSM);
Rate reduced to Laffey
(13-14); Fee reduced
20% (Pre-11/6/14)
0.00
Hours reduced (RSM);
Fee reduced 20% (Pre11/6/14)
0.00
Hours reduced (RSM);
Rate reduced to Laffey
(13-14); Fee reduced
20% (Pre-11/6/14)
0.00
Hours reduced (RSM);
Rate reduced to Laffey
(13-14); Fee reduced
20% (Pre-11/6/14)
Telephone communication with
client
Review of case law regarding
06/07/13 CEM compensatory education
Interoffice communication with
H.B. Konkler-Goldsmith
06/13/13 CEM regarding records
0.125
0.250
0.125
Preparation of correspondence to
counsel, M. Washington,
regarding records
Review of Scheduling Order
Review of file materials
Update case status
Telephone communication with
D. Hodges regarding Resolution
Session and Due Process
0.500
06/14/13 CEM Hearing
N
ot
es
ar
d
A
w
A
dj
us
te
d
Fe
eC
re
di
te
d
Fe
eC
la
im
ed
Civil Action No. 15‐851 (ESH)
ed
H
ou
rs
C
re
di
te
d
R
at
eC
la
im
ed
R
at
eC
re
di
te
d
H
Interoffice communications with
M. Buczkowski regarding
Resolution Session
Telephone communication with
06/06/13 CEM client regarding same
0.500
06/06/13 MM
Page 9 of 104
ou
rs
C
la
im
or
m
ed
W
or
k
Pe
rf
ls
In
iti
a
D
at
e
Attachment to Mem. Op. [ECF No. 30]
0.000
275.00
250.00
137.50
0.00
0.00
0.000
140.00
116.00
17.50
0.00
0.00
Hours reduced (RSM);
Rate reduced to Laffey
(13-14); Fee reduced
20% (Pre-11/6/14)
Hours reduced (RSM);
Fee reduced 20% (Pre11/6/14)
50.00
Rate reduced to Laffey
(13-14); Fee reduced by
20% (Pre-11/6/14)
25.00
Rate reduced to Laffey
(13-14); Fee reduced by
20% (Pre-11/6/14)
50.00
Hours reduced (RSM);
Rate reduced to Laffey
(13-14); Fee reduced
20% (Pre-11/6/14)
0.250
0.125
0.250
275.00
275.00
275.00
250.00
250.00
250.00
68.75
34.38
137.50
62.50
31.25
62.50
Interoffice communications with
H.B. Konkler-Goldsmith
regarding records and Resolution
Session
Review of correspondence from
C. Anaghotu regarding
Resolution Session
Telephone communications with
client regarding same
Interoffice communication with
J. Bradley and D. Beer regarding
scheduling
Review of correspondence from
Hearing Officer Massey
regarding pre-hearing conference
Review of correspondence from
counsel, M. Washington,
regarding same
Review of correspondence from
A. Terry regarding facilitated
resolution
Preparation of correspondence to
A. Terry regarding same
Preparation of correspondence to
C. Anaghotu regarding
Resolution Session
Preparation of correspondences
to Hearing Officer regarding pre2.125
06/17/13 CEM hearing conference
1.125
275.00
250.00
584.38
281.25
225.00
Preparation of correspondences
to Hearing Officer Massey
regarding prehearing conference
Review of correspondence from
Hearing Officer regarding same
Interoffice communications with
H.B. Konkler-Goldsmith
regarding records
Review of correspondence from
counsel, M. Washington, to
Hearing Officer regarding
1.125
06/18/13 CEM prehearing
1.130
275.00
250.00
309.38
282.50
226.00
Review of correspondence from
06/19/13 HBK DCPS
0.500
0.000
430.00
430.00
215.00
0.00
0.00
N
ot
es
ar
d
A
w
A
dj
us
te
d
Fe
eC
re
di
te
d
ed
Civil Action No. 15‐851 (ESH)
Fe
eC
la
im
ou
rs
C
la
im
ed
H
ou
rs
C
re
di
te
d
R
at
eC
la
im
ed
R
at
eC
re
di
te
d
Page 10 of 104
H
or
m
ed
W
or
k
Pe
rf
ls
In
iti
a
D
at
e
Attachment to Mem. Op. [ECF No. 30]
Hours reduced (RSM);
Rate reduced to Laffey
(13-14); Fee reduced
20% (Pre-11/6/14)
Rate reduced to Laffey
(13-14); Fee reduced by
20% (Pre-11/6/14)
Hours reduced (RSM);
Fee reduced 20% (Pre11/6/14)
Review of correspondence from
C. Ahaghotu regarding
resolution session
Preparation of correspondence to
C. Ahaghotu regarding same
Preparation of correspondence to
counsel
0.750
06/20/13 CEM Facilitate resolution session
Review of correspondences from
counsel, M. Washington,
regarding records, Resolution
Session and settlement
Preparation of correspondences
to counsel regarding same
Interoffice communications with
H.B. Konkler-Goldsmith
regarding settlement, Due
Process Hearing, pro hac vice
and Five-Day Notices
Interoffice communication with
L. Mehalick regarding pro hac
vice
Research regarding same
Telephone communications with
client regarding settlement
Preparation of Motion to Admit
2.500
06/21/13 CEM Pro Hac Vice
Review of correspondence from
counsel, M. Washington,
regarding records
Interoffice communications with
H.B. Konkler-Goldsmith
0.500
06/22/13 CEM regarding same
0.000
0.000
2.000
0.500
275.00
275.00
275.00
275.00
250.00
250.00
250.00
250.00
68.75
206.25
687.50
137.50
0.00
500.00
125.00
N
ot
es
ar
d
A
w
A
dj
us
te
d
ed
0.00
Fe
eC
re
di
te
d
H
Interoffice communication with
H.B. Konkler-Goldsmith
regarding records
Telephone communication with
counsel, M. Washington,
regarding records and Resolution
06/19/13 CEM Meeting
0.250
Civil Action No. 15‐851 (ESH)
Fe
eC
la
im
ed
H
ou
rs
C
re
di
te
d
R
at
eC
la
im
ed
R
at
eC
re
di
te
d
Page 11 of 104
ou
rs
C
la
im
or
m
ed
W
or
k
Pe
rf
ls
In
iti
a
D
at
e
Attachment to Mem. Op. [ECF No. 30]
0.00
Hours reduced (RSM);
Rate reduced to Laffey
(13-14); Fee reduced
20% (Pre-11/6/14)
0.00
Hours reduced (RSM);
Rate reduced to Laffey
(13-14); Fee reduced
20% (Pre-11/6/14)
400.00
Hours reduced (RSM);
Rate reduced to Laffey
(13-14); Fee reduced
20% (Pre-11/6/14)
100.00
Rate reduced to Laffey
(13-14); Fee reduced by
20% (Pre-11/6/14)
Telephone communication with
06/23/13 CEM client regarding records
0.125
0.125
275.00
250.00
34.38
31.25
25.00
Rate reduced to Laffey
(13-14); Fee reduced by
20% (Pre-11/6/14)
Review of file
materials/Interoffice
communication regarding Due
Process Hearing
06/24/13 HBK Preparation for same
1.750
1.750
430.00
430.00
752.50
752.50
602.00
Fee reduced 20% (Pre11/6/14)
Interoffice communications with
H.B. Konkler-Goldsmith and D.
Weidman regarding DC Bar
Application and Due Process
Hearing
Telephone communication with
D. Hodges regarding settlement
and Due Process Hearing
Telephone communications with
client regarding Due Process
Hearing and settlement
Preparation of correspondences
to counsel, M. Washington,
regarding records and Facilitated
Resolution
Preparation of correspondence to
C. Ahaghotu regarding
Resolution Session
Preparation of pro hac vice
1.625
06/24/13 CEM Motion
Pre-Hearing Conference
Review of correspondence from
06/25/13 HBK Hearing Officer
1.250
Travel to school to pick up
records
Review of correspondence from
Hearing Officer Massey
regarding prehearing conference
Review of Prehearing
Conference Notice
Review of School District
records
Attend prehearing conference
Telephone communication with
counsel
Interoffice communication with
H.B. Konkler-Goldsmith
regarding Due Process Hearing
and pro hac vice
Preparation of correspondence to
counsel
Telephone communication with
4.125
06/25/13 CEM client
Telephone communication with
client
Preparation of correspondence to
C. Ahagotu regarding resolution
0.500
06/26/13 CEM session
N
ot
es
ar
d
A
w
A
dj
us
te
d
Fe
eC
re
di
te
d
ed
Civil Action No. 15‐851 (ESH)
Fe
eC
la
im
ou
rs
C
la
im
ed
H
ou
rs
C
re
di
te
d
R
at
eC
la
im
ed
R
at
eC
re
di
te
d
Page 12 of 104
H
or
m
ed
W
or
k
Pe
rf
ls
In
iti
a
D
at
e
Attachment to Mem. Op. [ECF No. 30]
1.500
275.00
250.00
446.88
375.00
300.00
Hours reduced (RSM);
Rate reduced to Laffey
(13-14); Fee reduced
20% (Pre-11/6/14)
1.250
430.00
430.00
537.50
537.50
430.00
Fee reduced 20% (Pre11/6/14)
800.00
Hours reduced (travel);
Rate reduced to Laffey
(13-14); Fee reduced
20% (Pre-11/6/14)
0.00
Hours reduced (RSM);
Rate reduced to Laffey
(13-14); Fee reduced
20% (Pre-11/6/14)
4.000
0.000
275.00
275.00
250.00
250.00
1,168.75
137.50
1,000.00
0.00
Interoffice communication with
C. McAndrews regarding
settlement
Telephone communication with
counsel, M. Washington,
06/28/13 HBK regarding same
Preparation of correspondence to
D. Hodges regarding resolution
session
Preparation of correspondence to
counsel
06/30/13 CEM Preparation for hearing
2.500
07/01/13 MM
0.125
Preparation for, travel to and
attendance at Resolution Session
Review of correspondence from
counsel
Review of correspondence from
6.000
07/01/13 HBK Hearing Officer
0.250
1.000
2.000
0.125
0.250
430.00
275.00
275.00
140.00
430.00
430.00
250.00
250.00
116.00
430.00
107.50
275.00
687.50
17.50
2,580.00
107.50
250.00
500.00
14.50
107.50
N
ot
es
ar
d
A
w
A
dj
us
te
d
Fe
eC
re
di
te
d
ed
Civil Action No. 15‐851 (ESH)
Fe
eC
la
im
ed
H
ou
rs
C
re
di
te
d
R
at
eC
la
im
ed
R
at
eC
re
di
te
d
H
0.250
Interoffice communication with
H.B. Konkler-Goldsmith
regarding settlement and FiveDay Notices
Telephone communication with
counsel
Review of Prehearing Order
Preparation of correspondence to
counsel
Preparation of correspondence to
1.000
06/28/13 CEM client
Telephone communication with
client
Page 13 of 104
ou
rs
C
la
im
or
m
ed
W
or
k
Pe
rf
ls
In
iti
a
D
at
e
Attachment to Mem. Op. [ECF No. 30]
86.00
Fee reduced 20% (Pre11/6/14)
200.00
Rate reduced to Laffey
(13-14); Fee reduced by
20% (Pre-11/6/14)
400.00
Hours reduced (RSM);
Rate reduced to Laffey
(13-14); Fee reduced
20% (Pre-11/6/14)
11.60
Rate reduced to 75%
USAO; Fee reduced by
20% (Pre-11/6/14)
86.00
Hours reduced (RSM);
Fee reduced 20% (Pre11/6/14)
07/02/13 MM
07/02/13 DW
Preparation of file contents
0.500
4.000
Interoffice communication with
H.B. Konkler-Goldsmith
regarding withdrawal of Due
Process Complaint and Five-Day
Notices
Interoffice communication with
07/02/13 CEM M. Buczkowski regarding same 1.000
Review of correspondence from
07/03/13 HBK Hearing Officer
0.125
3.000
0.500
4.000
275.00
140.00
130.00
250.00
116.00
116.00
1,718.75
70.00
520.00
750.00
58.00
464.00
N
ot
es
ar
d
A
w
A
dj
us
te
d
Fe
eC
re
di
te
d
ed
Civil Action No. 15‐851 (ESH)
Fe
eC
la
im
ed
H
ou
rs
C
re
di
te
d
R
at
eC
la
im
ed
R
at
eC
re
di
te
d
H
Review of correspondence from
D. Hodges regarding resolution
session
Preparation of correspondence to
D. Hodges regarding same
Review of correspondence from
counsel
Telephone communication with
client
Preparation of Five-Day Notices
Research regarding Notices to
appear and expert witnesses
Interoffice communication with
M. Buczkowski regarding
Resolution Session
Interoffice communication with
H.B. Konkler-Goldsmith
regarding withdrawal, S/L
Pathologist and Due Process
Hearing
Preparation for Resolution
Session
Preparation of correspondence to
Hearing Officer Massey
regarding witnesses
Preparation of correspondence to
colleagues regarding withdrawal
of Due Process Complaint
Review of correspondence from
Hearing Officer Massey
regarding witnesses
Review of correspondence from
A. Crawford regarding
Resolution Session
Preparation of Motion to
6.250
07/01/13 CEM Withdraw
Preparation and filing of FiveDay Notices
Page 14 of 104
ou
rs
C
la
im
or
m
ed
W
or
k
Pe
rf
ls
In
iti
a
D
at
e
Attachment to Mem. Op. [ECF No. 30]
600.00
Hours reduced (RSM);
Rate reduced to Laffey
(13-14); Fee reduced
20% (Pre-11/6/14)
46.40
Rate reduced to 75%
USAO; Fee reduced by
20% (Pre-11/6/14)
371.20
Rate reduced to 75%
USAO; Fee reduced by
20% (Pre-11/6/14)
1.000
275.00
250.00
275.00
250.00
200.00
0.125
430.00
430.00
53.75
53.75
43.00
Rate reduced to Laffey
(13-14); Fee reduced by
20% (Pre-11/6/14)
Fee reduced 20% (Pre11/6/14)
0.130
275.00
250.00
68.75
N
ot
es
ar
d
A
w
A
dj
us
te
d
ed
32.50
Fe
eC
re
di
te
d
H
Review of Order of Withdrawal
Interoffice communication with
H.B. Konkler-Goldsmith
07/03/13 CEM regarding resolution session
0.250
Civil Action No. 15‐851 (ESH)
Fe
eC
la
im
ed
H
ou
rs
C
re
di
te
d
R
at
eC
la
im
ed
R
at
eC
re
di
te
d
Page 15 of 104
ou
rs
C
la
im
or
m
ed
W
or
k
Pe
rf
ls
In
iti
a
D
at
e
Attachment to Mem. Op. [ECF No. 30]
26.00
Rate reduced to Laffey
(13-14); Fee reduced by
20% (Pre-11/6/14)
Telephone communication with
T. Sterling regarding redacted
report
Research S/L evaluators
Telephone communication with
Scottish Rite Center for Hearing
and Speech regarding evaluators
Telephone communication with
National Speech/Language
Therapy Center regarding
evaluators
Preparation of correspondence to
National S/L Therapy Center
regarding evaluators
Review of correspondence from
T. Sterling regarding S/L
0.875
07/09/13 CEM evaluation
0.875
275.00
250.00
240.63
218.75
175.00
Rate reduced to Laffey
(13-14); Fee reduced by
20% (Pre-11/6/14)
Interoffice communication with
C. McAndrews regarding Due
07/10/13 HBK Process Hearing and IEE
0.125
430.00
430.00
53.75
53.75
43.00
Fee reduced 20% (Pre11/6/14)
275.00
Rate reduced to Laffey
(13-14); Fee reduced by
20% (Pre-11/6/14)
50.00
Rate reduced to Laffey
(13-14); Fee reduced by
20% (Pre-11/6/14)
100.00
Rate reduced to Laffey
(13-14); Fee reduced by
20% (Pre-11/6/14)
0.125
Preparation of correspondence to
counsel, M. Washington,
regarding records
Preparation of correspondence to
K. Conaboy regarding S/L IEE
Review of correspondences from
National Speech regarding IEE
Interoffice communications with
H.B. Konkler-Goldsmith
regarding compensatory
education case law, Due Process
Hearing and IEE
Preparation of correspondences
to National Speech regarding
1.375
07/10/13 CEM IEE
Review of correspondence from
K. Conaboy regarding S/L IEE
Interoffice communication with
H.B. Konkler-Goldsmith
07/15/13 CEM regarding same
0.250
Telephone communication with
client
Preparation of correspondence to
07/22/13 CEM K. Conaboy regarding S/L IEE 0.500
1.375
0.250
0.500
275.00
275.00
275.00
250.00
250.00
250.00
378.13
68.75
137.50
343.75
62.50
125.00
0.125
275.00
250.00
34.38
N
ot
es
ar
d
A
w
A
dj
us
te
d
ed
31.25
Fe
eC
re
di
te
d
H
Telephone communication with
Conaboy & Assoicates regarding
07/30/13 CEM S/L IEE
0.125
Civil Action No. 15‐851 (ESH)
Fe
eC
la
im
ed
H
ou
rs
C
re
di
te
d
R
at
eC
la
im
ed
R
at
eC
re
di
te
d
Page 16 of 104
ou
rs
C
la
im
or
m
ed
W
or
k
Pe
rf
ls
In
iti
a
D
at
e
Attachment to Mem. Op. [ECF No. 30]
25.00
Rate reduced to Laffey
(13-14); Fee reduced by
20% (Pre-11/6/14)
Compilation and review of
records for evaluator
Telephone communication with
client
Preparation of correspondence to
08/02/13 CEM K. Conaboy regarding S/L IEE 1.000
1.000
275.00
250.00
275.00
250.00
200.00
Rate reduced to Laffey
(13-14); Fee reduced by
20% (Pre-11/6/14)
Interoffice communication with
08/06/13 HBK C. McAndrews regarding IEE
0.125
430.00
430.00
53.75
53.75
43.00
Fee reduced 20% (Pre11/6/14)
25.00
Rate reduced to Laffey
(13-14); Fee reduced by
20% (Pre-11/6/14)
125.00
Rate reduced to Laffey
(13-14); Fee reduced by
20% (Pre-11/6/14)
Interoffice communication with
H.B. Konkler-Goldsmith
08/06/13 CEM regarding IEE
08/11/13 CEM Preparation of IEE Request
08/12/13 CEM Preparation of IEE Request
Interoffice communication with
C. McAndrews regarding IEE
08/14/13 HBK request
08/14/13 DW
Preparation of records for
conference call
0.125
0.125
0.625
0.125
0.625
275.00
275.00
250.00
250.00
34.38
171.88
31.25
156.25
0.125
0.125
275.00
250.00
34.38
31.25
25.00
Rate reduced to Laffey
(13-14); Fee reduced by
20% (Pre-11/6/14)
0.250
0.250
430.00
430.00
107.50
107.50
86.00
Fee reduced 20% (Pre11/6/14)
11.60
Rate reduced to 75%
USAO; Fee reduced by
20% (Pre-11/6/14)
0.125
0.125
130.00
116.00
16.25
14.50
Interoffice communication with
H.B. Konkler-Goldsmith
08/14/13 CEM regarding IEE Request
Interoffice communication with
H.B. Konkler-Goldsmith
08/16/13 JTN regarding IEE
0.125
0.125
275.00
250.00
34.38
31.25
25.00
Rate reduced to Laffey
(13-14); Fee reduced by
20% (Pre-11/6/14)
0.125
0.125
240.00
240.00
30.00
30.00
24.00
Fee reduced 20% (Pre11/6/14)
Interoffice communication with
08/16/13 HBK C. McAndrews regarding IEE
0.125
0.125
430.00
430.00
53.75
53.75
43.00
Fee reduced 20% (Pre11/6/14)
23.20
Rate reduced to 75%
USAO; Fee reduced by
20% (Pre-11/6/14)
75.00
Rate reduced to Laffey
(13-14); Fee reduced by
20% (Pre-11/6/14)
08/16/13 MM
Revise and file IEE request
0.250
Preparation of IEE request
Interoffice communication with
M. Buczkowski regarding same
Preparation of correspondence to
counsel
Interoffice communication with
H.B. Konkler-Goldsmith
0.375
08/16/13 CEM regarding IEE
0.250
0.375
140.00
275.00
116.00
250.00
35.00
103.13
29.00
93.75
0.875
275.00
250.00
240.63
N
ot
es
ar
d
A
w
A
dj
us
te
d
ed
218.75
Fe
eC
re
di
te
d
H
Review of correspondence from
K. Conaboy regarding IEE
Telephone communication with
client regarding same
Telephone communication with
D. Hodges regarding client
contact
Preparation of correspondence to
client regarding communication
and IEE
Interoffice communication with
M. Buczkowski regarding client
communication
Preparation of correspondence to
0.875
08/26/13 CEM K. Conaboy regarding IEE
Civil Action No. 15‐851 (ESH)
Fe
eC
la
im
ed
H
ou
rs
C
re
di
te
d
R
at
eC
la
im
ed
R
at
eC
re
di
te
d
Page 17 of 104
ou
rs
C
la
im
or
m
ed
W
or
k
Pe
rf
ls
In
iti
a
D
at
e
Attachment to Mem. Op. [ECF No. 30]
175.00
Rate reduced to Laffey
(13-14); Fee reduced by
20% (Pre-11/6/14)
Review of correspondence from
K. Marcus regarding IEE request
Preparation of correspondence to
D. Hodges regarding client
communication
Review of correspondence from
D. Hodges regarding client
0.500
09/03/13 CEM contact
0.500
275.00
250.00
137.50
125.00
100.00
Rate reduced to Laffey
(13-14); Fee reduced by
20% (Pre-11/6/14)
Interoffice communication with
C. McAndrews regarding client
09/04/13 HBK contact and IEE request
0.125
430.00
430.00
53.75
53.75
43.00
Fee reduced 20% (Pre11/6/14)
75.00
Rate reduced to Laffey
(13-14); Fee reduced by
20% (Pre-11/6/14)
50.00
Rate reduced to Laffey
(13-14); Fee reduced by
20% (Pre-11/6/14)
50.00
Rate reduced to Laffey
(13-14); Fee reduced by
20% (Pre-11/6/14)
0.125
Preparation of correspondence to
D. Hodges regarding client
contact
Review of correspondence from
D. Hodges regarding client
contact
Interoffice communication with
H.B. Konkler-Goldsmith
regarding client contact and IEE
0.375
09/04/13 CEM request
Interoffice communication with
R. Paul regarding client contact
information
Review of correspondence from
D. Hodges regarding client
communication
Preparation of correspondence to
0.250
09/05/13 CEM D. Hodges regarding same
Telephone communication with
client
Telephone communication with
D. Hodges regarding contact
09/09/13 CEM with client
0.250
0.375
0.250
0.250
275.00
275.00
275.00
250.00
250.00
250.00
103.13
68.75
68.75
93.75
62.50
62.50
Telephone communication with
D. Hodges regarding client
09/12/13 CEM communication
09/13/13 MM
Interoffice communication with
C. McAndrews regarding S/L
evaluation
09/16/13 MM
Telephone communication with
D. Hodges regarding client
09/24/13 CEM communication
Telephone communication with
09/26/13 CEM client
0.125
0.250
0.125
0.250
0.125
0.125
0.125
0.250
0.125
0.250
275.00
140.00
275.00
140.00
275.00
275.00
250.00
116.00
250.00
116.00
250.00
250.00
34.38
17.50
34.38
35.00
34.38
68.75
31.25
14.50
31.25
29.00
31.25
62.50
N
ot
es
ar
d
A
w
A
dj
us
te
d
Fe
eC
re
di
te
d
ed
Civil Action No. 15‐851 (ESH)
Fe
eC
la
im
ed
H
ou
rs
C
re
di
te
d
R
at
eC
la
im
ed
R
at
eC
re
di
te
d
H
0.125
Interoffice communication with
M. Buczkowski regarding client
communication, IEE Request
09/13/13 CEM and S/L IEE
0.125
Telephone communication with
client
Page 18 of 104
ou
rs
C
la
im
or
m
ed
W
or
k
Pe
rf
ls
In
iti
a
D
at
e
Attachment to Mem. Op. [ECF No. 30]
25.00
Rate reduced to Laffey
(13-14); Fee reduced by
20% (Pre-11/6/14)
11.60
Rate reduced to 75%
USAO; Fee reduced by
20% (Pre-11/6/14)
25.00
Rate reduced to Laffey
(13-14); Fee reduced by
20% (Pre-11/6/14)
23.20
Rate reduced to 75%
USAO; Fee reduced by
20% (Pre-11/6/14)
25.00
Rate reduced to Laffey
(13-14); Fee reduced by
20% (Pre-11/6/14)
50.00
Rate reduced to Laffey
(13-14); Fee reduced by
20% (Pre-11/6/14)
Interoffice communication with
H.B. Konkler-Goldsmith
10/02/13 CEM regarding IEE request
0.125
0.125
275.00
250.00
34.38
31.25
25.00
Rate reduced to Laffey
(13-14); Fee reduced by
20% (Pre-11/6/14)
Intraoffice communication with
10/08/13 HBK C. McAndrews regarding IEE
0.125
0.125
430.00
430.00
53.75
53.75
43.00
Fee reduced 20% (Pre11/6/14)
75.00
Rate reduced to Laffey
(13-14); Fee reduced by
20% (Pre-11/6/14)
125.00
Rate reduced to Laffey
(13-14); Fee reduced by
20% (Pre-11/6/14)
Preparation of correspondence to
K. Marcus and M. Washington
regarding IEE
Review of correspondence from
M. Washington regarding IEE
Request
Interoffice communication with
H.B. Konkler-Goldsmith
0.375
10/08/13 CEM regarding IEE
Telephone communication with
client regarding IEE
Preparation of correspondence to
counsel, M. Washington,
regarding same
Preparation of correspondences
to K. Conaboy regarding S/L
evaluation
Review of file materials K.
0.625
10/09/13 CEM Conaboy regarding same
0.375
0.625
275.00
275.00
250.00
250.00
103.13
171.88
93.75
156.25
0.125
Preparation of correspondence to
10/23/13 CEM counsel
0.125
Telephone communication with
client
Telephone communication with
D. Hodges regarding
10/24/13 CEM compensatory education
0.250
N
ot
es
ar
d
A
w
A
dj
us
te
d
Fe
eC
re
di
te
d
ed
Civil Action No. 15‐851 (ESH)
Fe
eC
la
im
ed
H
ou
rs
C
re
di
te
d
R
at
eC
la
im
ed
R
at
eC
re
di
te
d
H
Interoffice communication with
H.B. Konkler-Goldsmith
regarding FBA
Telephone communications with
client regarding evaluation
Preparation of correspondence to
counsel, M. Washington,
regarding same
Review of correspondence from
0.750
10/10/13 CEM counsel regarding evaluation
Intraoffice communication with
C. McAndrews regarding IEE
10/14/13 HBK request
0.125
Interoffice communication with
H.B. Konkler-Goldsmith
10/14/13 CEM regarding IEE Request
Page 19 of 104
ou
rs
C
la
im
or
m
ed
W
or
k
Pe
rf
ls
In
iti
a
D
at
e
Attachment to Mem. Op. [ECF No. 30]
0.750
275.00
250.00
206.25
187.50
150.00
Rate reduced to Laffey
(13-14); Fee reduced by
20% (Pre-11/6/14)
0.125
430.00
430.00
53.75
53.75
43.00
Fee reduced 20% (Pre11/6/14)
25.00
Rate reduced to Laffey
(13-14); Fee reduced by
20% (Pre-11/6/14)
25.00
Rate reduced to Laffey
(13-14); Fee reduced by
20% (Pre-11/6/14)
50.00
Rate reduced to Laffey
(13-14); Fee reduced by
20% (Pre-11/6/14)
0.125
0.125
0.250
275.00
275.00
275.00
250.00
250.00
250.00
34.38
34.38
68.75
31.25
31.25
62.50
Review of correspondence from
Conaboy & Assoc. regarding S/L
IEE
Preparation of correspondence to
Conaboy & Assoc. regarding
same
Interoffice communication with
M. Buczkowski regarding S/L
0.250
10/28/13 CEM IEE
0.250
275.00
250.00
68.75
62.50
50.00
Rate reduced to Laffey
(13-14); Fee reduced by
20% (Pre-11/6/14)
Intraoffice communication with
10/30/13 HBK C. McAndrews regarding IEE
0.125
430.00
430.00
53.75
53.75
43.00
Fee reduced 20% (Pre11/6/14)
100.00
Rate reduced to Laffey
(13-14); Fee reduced by
20% (Pre-11/6/14)
25.00
Rate reduced to Laffey
(13-14); Fee reduced by
20% (Pre-11/6/14)
0.125
Review of correspondence from
K. Conaboy regarding IEE
Intraoffice communication with
H.B. Konkler-Goldsmith
regarding same
Research regarding IEE
providers
Preparation of correspondence to
0.500
10/30/13 CEM Dr. Iseman regarding IEE
Telephone communication with
11/01/13 CEM client
0.125
0.500
0.125
275.00
275.00
250.00
250.00
137.50
34.38
125.00
31.25
Telephone communication with
client regarding IEE and
behaviors
Preparation of correspondence to
K. Marcus regarding FBA and
IEE
Review of records regarding
11/08/13 CEM current school year
0.750
Telephone communications with
D. Hodges regarding contact
11/12/13 CEM information
0.250
Intraoffice communication with
H.B. Konkler-Goldsmith
regarding communication with
client and IEE
Preparation of correspondence to
K. Marcus regarding IEE
11/13/13 CEM Request
0.375
Intraoffice communication with
C. McAndrews regarding S/L
0.125
11/20/13 HBK IEE
Review of S/L IEE
Intraoffice communication with
H.B. Konkler-Goldsmith
regarding same
Preparation of correspondence to
11/20/13 CEM K. Conaboy regarding S/L IEE 0.750
Review of correspondence from
11/21/13 CEM K. Conaboy regarding S/L IEE 0.125
11/25/13 PW
Intraoffice communication with
P. Wedderburn regarding Due
11/25/13 CEM Process Complaint
Telephone communication with
client regarding Due Process
12/06/13 CEM Complaint
2.000
0.125
0.125
0.375
0.750
0.250
275.00
275.00
275.00
250.00
250.00
250.00
103.13
206.25
68.75
93.75
187.50
62.50
N
ot
es
ar
d
A
w
A
dj
us
te
d
Fe
eC
re
di
te
d
ed
Civil Action No. 15‐851 (ESH)
Fe
eC
la
im
ed
H
ou
rs
C
re
di
te
d
R
at
eC
la
im
ed
R
at
eC
re
di
te
d
H
Telephone communication with
client regarding evaluation and
school
Telephone communication with
D. Hodges regarding contact
with client
Preparation of correspondence to
K. Conaboy regarding S/L
0.375
11/05/13 CEM evaluation
Preparation of Due Process
Complaint
Page 20 of 104
ou
rs
C
la
im
or
m
ed
W
or
k
Pe
rf
ls
In
iti
a
D
at
e
Attachment to Mem. Op. [ECF No. 30]
75.00
Rate reduced to Laffey
(13-14); Fee reduced by
20% (Pre-11/6/14)
150.00
Rate reduced to Laffey
(13-14); Fee reduced by
20% (Pre-11/6/14)
50.00
Rate reduced to Laffey
(13-14); Fee reduced by
20% (Pre-11/6/14)
0.375
275.00
250.00
103.13
93.75
75.00
Rate reduced to Laffey
(13-14); Fee reduced by
20% (Pre-11/6/14)
0.125
430.00
430.00
53.75
53.75
43.00
Fee reduced 20% (Pre11/6/14)
150.00
Rate reduced to Laffey
(13-14); Fee reduced by
20% (Pre-11/6/14)
25.00
Rate reduced to Laffey
(13-14); Fee reduced by
20% (Pre-11/6/14)
185.60
Rate reduced to 75%
USAO; Fee reduced by
20% (Pre-11/6/14)
25.00
Rate reduced to Laffey
(13-14); Fee reduced by
20% (Pre-11/6/14)
25.00
Rate reduced to Laffey
(13-14); Fee reduced by
20% (Pre-11/6/14)
0.750
0.125
2.000
0.125
0.125
275.00
275.00
130.00
275.00
275.00
250.00
250.00
116.00
250.00
250.00
206.25
34.38
260.00
34.38
34.38
187.50
31.25
232.00
31.25
31.25
N
ot
es
ar
d
A
w
A
dj
us
te
d
ed
Fe
eC
re
di
te
d
H
Civil Action No. 15‐851 (ESH)
Fe
eC
la
im
ed
H
ou
rs
C
re
di
te
d
R
at
eC
la
im
ed
R
at
eC
re
di
te
d
Pe
k
W
or
Preparation of Due Process
12/16/13 CEM Complaint
Intraoffice communication with
C. McAndrews regarding
01/08/14 HBK evaluation
Page 21 of 104
ou
rs
C
la
im
or
m
ed
rf
ls
In
iti
a
D
at
e
Attachment to Mem. Op. [ECF No. 30]
0.625
0.625
275.00
250.00
171.88
156.25
125.00
Rate reduced to Laffey
(13-14); Fee reduced by
20% (Pre-11/6/14)
0.125
0.125
430.00
430.00
53.75
53.75
43.00
Fee reduced 20% (Pre11/6/14)
Intraoffice communication with
H.B. Konkler-Goldsmith
01/08/14 CEM regarding private evaluation
0.125
0.125
275.00
250.00
34.38
31.25
25.00
01/10/14 HBK Review of records
0.250
0.250
430.00
430.00
107.50
107.50
86.00
Rate reduced to Laffey
(13-14); Fee reduced by
20% (Pre-11/6/14)
Fee reduced 20% (Pre11/6/14)
25.00
Rate reduced to Laffey
(13-14); Fee reduced by
20% (Pre-11/6/14)
50.00
Rate reduced to Laffey
(13-14); Fee reduced by
20% (Pre-11/6/14)
Intraoffice communication with
P. Wedderburn regarding
01/10/14 CEM evaluations
Review of evaluations
Intraoffice communication with
H.B. Konkler-Goldsmith
01/11/14 CEM regarding IEE
0.125
0.250
Telephone communication with
01/17/14 CEM D. Hodges regarding evaluation 0.125
Intraoffice communication with
C. McAndrews regarding
01/20/14 HBK evaluation
0.125
Intraoffice communication with
H.B. Konkler-Goldsmith
01/20/14 CEM regarding evaluation
Preparation of Due Process
01/24/14 CEM Complaint
Preparation of Due Process
01/27/14 CEM Complaint
Review and revise Due Process
01/28/14 HMH Complaint
0.125
0.250
0.500
0.375
Intraoffice communication with
H. Hulse regarding Due Process
Complaint revisions
Telephone communications with
client regarding Due Process
Complaint, progress, IEP
Meeting and FBA
Preparation of Due Process
1.375
01/29/14 CEM Complaint
0.125
0.250
275.00
275.00
250.00
250.00
34.38
68.75
31.25
62.50
0.125
275.00
250.00
34.38
31.25
25.00
Rate reduced to Laffey
(13-14); Fee reduced by
20% (Pre-11/6/14)
0.125
430.00
430.00
53.75
53.75
43.00
Fee reduced 20% (Pre11/6/14)
25.00
Rate reduced to Laffey
(13-14); Fee reduced by
20% (Pre-11/6/14)
50.00
Rate reduced to Laffey
(13-14); Fee reduced by
20% (Pre-11/6/14)
100.00
Rate reduced to Laffey
(13-14); Fee reduced by
20% (Pre-11/6/14)
108.00
Rate reduced to Laffey
(13-14); Fee reduced by
20% (Pre-11/6/14)
275.00
Rate reduced to Laffey
(13-14); Fee reduced by
20% (Pre-11/6/14)
0.125
0.250
0.500
0.375
1.375
275.00
275.00
275.00
380.00
275.00
250.00
250.00
250.00
360.00
250.00
34.38
68.75
137.50
142.50
378.13
31.25
62.50
125.00
135.00
343.75
Review of correspondence from
client
Preparation of correspondence to
02/04/14 CEM client
0.375
Intraoffice communication with
D. Dubose regarding scheduling
resolution meeting
Telephone communication with
T. Ingram regarding scheduling
02/05/14 CEM resolution meeting
0.250
Telephone communication with
T. Ingram regarding scheduling
02/07/14 CEM RSM
Telephone communication with
02/08/14 CEM client
0.375
0.125
0.125
Telephone communications with
client regarding IEP Meeting,
behavior, RSM and discipline
Intraoffice communication with
H.B. Konkler-Goldsmith
regarding IEP Meeting
Review of correspondence from
T. Ingram regarding RSM
Preparation of correspondence to
0.500
02/10/14 CEM T. Ingram regarding same
0.125
0.375
0.000
0.000
0.000
0.000
0.130
275.00
275.00
275.00
275.00
275.00
275.00
275.00
250.00
250.00
250.00
250.00
250.00
250.00
250.00
103.13
103.13
68.75
103.13
34.38
34.38
137.50
31.25
93.75
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
32.50
N
ot
es
ar
d
A
w
A
dj
us
te
d
Fe
eC
re
di
te
d
ed
Civil Action No. 15‐851 (ESH)
Fe
eC
la
im
ed
H
ou
rs
C
re
di
te
d
R
at
eC
la
im
ed
R
at
eC
re
di
te
d
H
Telephone communication with
DCPS Scheduler regarding RSM
Review of correspondence from
SHO regarding Hearing Officer
Appointment Notice
Review of correspondence from
Hearing Officer Massey
0.375
02/03/14 CEM regarding Initial Order
Telephone communication with
client
Telephone communication with
T. Ingram regarding scheduling
02/06/14 CEM resolution meeting
Page 22 of 104
ou
rs
C
la
im
or
m
ed
W
or
k
Pe
rf
ls
In
iti
a
D
at
e
Attachment to Mem. Op. [ECF No. 30]
25.00
Hours reduced (RSM);
Rate reduced to Laffey
(13-14); Fee reduced
20% (Pre-11/6/14)
75.00
Rate reduced to Laffey
(13-14); Fee reduced by
20% (Pre-11/6/14)
0.00
Hours reduced (RSM);
Rate reduced to Laffey
(13-14); Fee reduced
20% (Pre-11/6/14)
0.00
Hours reduced (RSM);
Rate reduced to Laffey
(13-14); Fee reduced
20% (Pre-11/6/14)
0.00
Hours reduced (RSM);
Rate reduced to Laffey
(13-14); Fee reduced
20% (Pre-11/6/14)
0.00
Hours reduced (RSM);
Rate reduced to Laffey
(13-14); Fee reduced
20% (Pre-11/6/14)
26.00
Hours reduced (RSM);
Rate reduced to Laffey
(13-14); Fee reduced
20% (Pre-11/6/14)
Review of DCPS Response to
Due Process Complaint
Review of text messages from
teacher to parent regarding
02/12/14 CEM behavior
Review of correspondence from
client regarding RSM
Telephone communication with
client regarding same
Preparation of correspondence to
02/14/14 CEM client regarding RSM
0.375
Telephone communication with
client regarding Resolution
02/18/14 DD
Meeting
0.125
02/19/14 DD
0.250
Telephone communication with
client
Preparation of correspondence to
client
0.125
Intraoffice communication with
D. Dubose regarding scheduling
resolution meeting
Review of correspondence from
T. Ingram regarding scheduling
Due Process Hearing
Preparation of correspondence to
0.375
02/19/14 CEM T. Ingram regarding same
02/20/14 DD
Telephone communications with
client regarding Resolution
Meeting
0.250
Intraoffice communication with
D. Dubose regarding RSM
Telephone communication with
client regarding same and IEP
Meeting
Preparation of correspondence to
02/20/14 CEM T. Ingram regarding RSM
0.375
0.250
0.000
275.00
275.00
250.00
250.00
68.75
68.75
62.50
0.00
N
ot
es
ar
d
A
w
A
dj
us
te
d
Fe
eC
re
di
te
d
ed
Civil Action No. 15‐851 (ESH)
Fe
eC
la
im
ed
H
ou
rs
C
re
di
te
d
R
at
eC
la
im
ed
R
at
eC
re
di
te
d
H
0.250
Preparation of correspondence to
T. Ingram regarding RSM
Telephone communication with
02/13/14 CEM client regarding same
0.250
Intraoffice communication with
D. Dubose regarding RSM
Telephone communication with
D. Hodges regarding Due
Process Complaint and
02/18/14 CEM discipline
Page 23 of 104
ou
rs
C
la
im
or
m
ed
W
or
k
Pe
rf
ls
In
iti
a
D
at
e
Attachment to Mem. Op. [ECF No. 30]
50.00
Rate reduced to Laffey
(13-14); Fee reduced by
20% (Pre-11/6/14)
0.00
Hours reduced (RSM);
Rate reduced to Laffey
(13-14); Fee reduced
20% (Pre-11/6/14)
0.000
275.00
250.00
103.13
0.00
0.00
0.000
145.00
116.00
18.13
0.00
0.00
Hours reduced (RSM);
Rate reduced to Laffey
(13-14); Fee reduced
20% (Pre-11/6/14)
Hours reduced (RSM);
Fee reduced 20% (Pre11/6/14)
26.00
Hours reduced (RSM);
Rate reduced to Laffey
(13-14); Fee reduced
20% (Pre-11/6/14)
0.00
Hours reduced (RSM);
Fee reduced 20% (Pre11/6/14)
25.00
Hours reduced (RSM);
Rate reduced to Laffey
(13-14); Fee reduced
20% (Pre-11/6/14)
0.00
Hours reduced (RSM);
Fee reduced 20% (Pre11/6/14)
0.00
Hours reduced (RSM);
Rate reduced to Laffey
(13-14); Fee reduced
20% (Pre-11/6/14)
0.130
0.000
0.125
0.000
0.000
275.00
145.00
275.00
145.00
275.00
250.00
116.00
250.00
116.00
250.00
68.75
18.13
103.13
36.25
103.13
32.50
0.00
31.25
0.00
0.00
Intraoffice communication with
H.B. Konkler-Goldsmith
02/21/14 CEM regarding RSM and IEP
02/26/14 DD
Telephone communication with
DCPS resolution scheduler to
confirm 2/27 session
Intraoffice communication with
D. Dubose regarding resolution
meeting
Telephone communication with
02/26/14 CEM client
0.125
0.250
Telephone communication with
M. Smith regarding RSM
Telephone communication with
client
02/27/14 CEM Travel to and attendance at RSM 2.375
Review of correspondence from
Hearing Officer Massey
regarding Prehearing Conference
Review of correspondence from
counsel
Preparation of correspondence to
Hearing Officer Massey
regarding Prehearing Conference
Intraoffice communication with
H.B. Konkler-Goldsmith
0.625
02/28/14 CEM regarding attorneys fees
Preparation of correspondence to
M. Smith regarding request for
0.500
03/01/14 CEM FBA and increase in IEE rate
Review of correspondence from
03/05/14 CEM DCPS regarding RSM
0.125
Review of correspondences from
Hearing Officer Massey
regarding Prehearing Conference
Review of correspondence from
counsel, L. Smalls, regarding
same
Preparation of correspondence to
Hearing Officer regarding
0.500
03/06/14 CEM Prehearing Conference
0.000
0.000
0.000
0.000
0.625
0.500
0.000
0.500
275.00
145.00
275.00
275.00
275.00
275.00
275.00
275.00
250.00
116.00
250.00
250.00
250.00
250.00
250.00
250.00
34.38
18.13
68.75
653.13
171.88
137.50
34.38
137.50
0.00
0.00
0.00
156.25
125.00
0.00
125.00
N
ot
es
ar
d
A
w
A
dj
us
te
d
ed
0.00
Fe
eC
re
di
te
d
H
0.125
Civil Action No. 15‐851 (ESH)
Fe
eC
la
im
ed
H
ou
rs
C
re
di
te
d
R
at
eC
la
im
ed
R
at
eC
re
di
te
d
Page 24 of 104
ou
rs
C
la
im
or
m
ed
W
or
k
Pe
rf
ls
In
iti
a
D
at
e
Attachment to Mem. Op. [ECF No. 30]
0.00
Hours reduced (RSM);
Rate reduced to Laffey
(13-14); Fee reduced
20% (Pre-11/6/14)
0.00
Hours reduced (RSM);
Fee reduced 20% (Pre11/6/14)
0.00
Hours reduced (RSM);
Rate reduced to Laffey
(13-14); Fee reduced
20% (Pre-11/6/14)
0.00
Hours reduced (RSM);
Rate reduced to Laffey
(13-14); Fee reduced
20% (Pre-11/6/14)
125.00
Rate reduced to Laffey
(13-14); Fee reduced by
20% (Pre-11/6/14)
100.00
Rate reduced to Laffey
(13-14); Fee reduced by
20% (Pre-11/6/14)
0.00
Hours reduced (RSM);
Rate reduced to Laffey
(13-14); Fee reduced
20% (Pre-11/6/14)
100.00
Rate reduced to Laffey
(13-14); Fee reduced by
20% (Pre-11/6/14)
Review of correspondence from
counsel, L. Smalls, regarding
Prehearing Conference
Review of correspondence from
Hearing Officer Massey
03/07/14 CEM regarding same
0.250
Review of correspondence from
Hearing Officer regarding
Prehearing Conference Notice
Preparation of correspondence
regarding Prehearing Conference
03/11/14 CEM Order
0.375
Prehearing Conference
Preparation of correspondence to
counsel
Preparation of correspondence to
Hearing Officer Massey and L.
Smalls regarding witnesses
Review of correspondence from
0.500
03/12/14 CEM counsel
Preparation of correspondence to
03/13/14 CEM colleagues regarding IEE rates 0.250
Review of Prehearing
Conference Order
Review of correspondences from
Hearing Officer Massey
regarding same
Preparation of Motion for
Summary Judgment
Review of correspondences from
counsel, L. Smalls, regarding
evaluations and Prehearing
Conference Order
Preparation of correspondences
to Hearing Officer regarding
Prehearing Conference Order
Research regarding DC IEE
providers
Intraoffice communication with
D. Dubose regarding redacted
reports
Intraoffice communication with
H.B. Konkler-Goldsmith
regarding evaluation, Due
Process Hearing and withdrawal
2.125
03/14/14 CEM of Due Process Complaint
0.250
0.375
0.500
0.250
2.130
275.00
275.00
275.00
275.00
275.00
250.00
250.00
250.00
250.00
250.00
68.75
103.13
137.50
68.75
584.38
62.50
93.75
125.00
62.50
532.50
N
ot
es
ar
d
A
w
A
dj
us
te
d
Fe
eC
re
di
te
d
ed
Civil Action No. 15‐851 (ESH)
Fe
eC
la
im
ou
rs
C
la
im
ed
H
ou
rs
C
re
di
te
d
R
at
eC
la
im
ed
R
at
eC
re
di
te
d
Page 25 of 104
H
or
m
ed
W
or
k
Pe
rf
ls
In
iti
a
D
at
e
Attachment to Mem. Op. [ECF No. 30]
50.00
Rate reduced to Laffey
(13-14); Fee reduced by
20% (Pre-11/6/14)
75.00
Rate reduced to Laffey
(13-14); Fee reduced by
20% (Pre-11/6/14)
100.00
Rate reduced to Laffey
(13-14); Fee reduced by
20% (Pre-11/6/14)
50.00
Rate reduced to Laffey
(13-14); Fee reduced by
20% (Pre-11/6/14)
426.00
Rate reduced to Laffey
(13-14); Fee reduced by
20% (Pre-11/6/14)
0.750
275.00
250.00
206.25
N
ot
es
ar
d
A
w
A
dj
us
te
d
ed
187.50
Fe
eC
re
di
te
d
H
Review of correspondence from
Hearing Officer Massey
regarding Prehearing Order
Telephone communication with
counsel, L. Smalls, regarding
withdrawal
Telephone communication with
client regarding same
Preparation of correspondence to
client regarding evaluations and
withdrawal
Preparation of correspondence to
0.750
03/18/14 CEM Dr. Levisohn regarding IEE
Civil Action No. 15‐851 (ESH)
Fe
eC
la
im
ed
H
ou
rs
C
re
di
te
d
R
at
eC
la
im
ed
R
at
eC
re
di
te
d
Page 26 of 104
ou
rs
C
la
im
or
m
ed
W
or
k
Pe
rf
ls
In
iti
a
D
at
e
Attachment to Mem. Op. [ECF No. 30]
150.00
Rate reduced to Laffey
(13-14); Fee reduced by
20% (Pre-11/6/14)
Telephone communication with
client regarding withdrawal
Review of correspondence from
Dr. Levisohn regarding
evaluation
Telephone communication with
Dr. Levisohn regarding same
Preparation of Motion to
Withdraw
Intraoffice communication with
H.B. Konkler-Goldsmith
0.625
03/19/14 CEM regarding same
0.625
275.00
250.00
171.88
156.25
125.00
Rate reduced to Laffey
(13-14); Fee reduced by
20% (Pre-11/6/14)
Review of file
materials/Intraoffice
communication regarding
03/21/14 HBK suspension
0.125
430.00
430.00
53.75
53.75
43.00
Fee reduced 20% (Pre11/6/14)
0.125
Telephone communication with
client
Intraoffice communication with
H.B. Konkler-Goldsmith
03/21/14 CEM regarding suspension
0.250
0.250
275.00
250.00
68.75
62.50
50.00
Rate reduced to Laffey
(13-14); Fee reduced by
20% (Pre-11/6/14)
Review of file
materials/Intraoffice
communication regarding
03/24/14 HBK Motion to Dismiss
0.125
0.125
430.00
430.00
53.75
53.75
43.00
Fee reduced 20% (Pre11/6/14)
125.00
Rate reduced to Laffey
(13-14); Fee reduced by
20% (Pre-11/6/14)
Telephone communications with
counsel, L. Smalls, regarding
behavior and Due Process
Hearing
Preparation of correspondence to
counsel regarding same
Intraoffice communication with
H.B. Konkler-Goldsmith
regarding Motion to Withdraw
0.625
03/24/14 CEM Preparation of same
0.625
275.00
250.00
171.88
156.25
Review of file
materials/Intraoffice
communication regarding
03/25/14 HBK Permission to Evaluate
03/25/14 DD
Submission of Motion
0.125
Review of correspondence from
client regarding communication
Preparation of correspondence to
client regarding same
Telephone communications with
client regarding suspension
Intraoffice communication with
H.B. Konkler-Goldsmith
regarding Permission to Evaluate
1.000
03/25/14 CEM Review of Order
Review of correspondence from
counsel, L. Smalls, regarding
FBA
Intraoffice communication with
H.B. Konkler-Goldsmith
regarding Permission to Evaluate
Telephone communication with
0.375
03/26/14 CEM client regarding suspension
0.125
0.125
1.000
0.375
430.00
145.00
275.00
275.00
430.00
116.00
250.00
250.00
53.75
18.13
275.00
103.13
14.50
250.00
93.75
N
ot
es
ar
d
A
w
A
dj
us
te
d
ed
53.75
Fe
eC
re
di
te
d
H
0.125
Civil Action No. 15‐851 (ESH)
Fe
eC
la
im
ed
H
ou
rs
C
re
di
te
d
R
at
eC
la
im
ed
R
at
eC
re
di
te
d
Page 27 of 104
ou
rs
C
la
im
or
m
ed
W
or
k
Pe
rf
ls
In
iti
a
D
at
e
Attachment to Mem. Op. [ECF No. 30]
43.00
Fee reduced 20% (Pre11/6/14)
11.60
Rate reduced to 75%
USAO; Fee reduced by
20% (Pre-11/6/14)
200.00
Rate reduced to Laffey
(13-14); Fee reduced by
20% (Pre-11/6/14)
75.00
Rate reduced to Laffey
(13-14); Fee reduced by
20% (Pre-11/6/14)
Review of correspondence from
counsel, L. Smalls, regarding
suspension
Telephone communication with
client regarding same
Preparation of correspondence to
client regarding Consent to
0.500
03/27/14 CEM Evaluate
0.500
275.00
250.00
137.50
125.00
100.00
Rate reduced to Laffey
(13-14); Fee reduced by
20% (Pre-11/6/14)
Review of file
materials/Intraoffice
communication regarding
03/28/14 HBK suspensions
0.125
430.00
430.00
53.75
53.75
43.00
Fee reduced 20% (Pre11/6/14)
25.00
Rate reduced to Laffey
(13-14); Fee reduced by
20% (Pre-11/6/14)
50.00
Rate reduced to Laffey
(13-14); Fee reduced by
20% (Pre-11/6/14)
Intraoffice communication with
H.B. Konkler-Goldsmith
03/28/14 CEM regarding suspensions
0.125
0.125
Telephone communication with
Dr. Levisohn regarding IEE
Preparation of correspondence to
04/07/14 CEM Dr. Levisohn regarding same
0.250
0.125
0.250
275.00
275.00
250.00
250.00
34.38
68.75
31.25
62.50
0.125
Review of correspondences from
counsel, L. Smalls, regarding
04/10/14 CEM IEE and behavior incidents
0.250
Review of discipline referral
forms
Telephone communication with
L. Levisohn regarding evaluation
Telephone communication with
04/11/14 CEM client
0.750
Review of correspondence to
School District regarding
04/15/14 JTN behavioral issues
0.250
Preparation of correspondence to
Dr. Levisohn regarding IEE
Intraoffice communication with
H.B. Konkler-Goldsmith
regarding payment for same
Preparation of correspondences
to counsel, L. Smalls, regarding
1.375
04/15/14 CEM behavior
Research regarding behavior
04/20/14 CEM assessment and intervention
0.250
N
ot
es
ar
d
A
w
A
dj
us
te
d
Fe
eC
re
di
te
d
ed
Civil Action No. 15‐851 (ESH)
Fe
eC
la
im
ed
H
ou
rs
C
re
di
te
d
R
at
eC
la
im
ed
R
at
eC
re
di
te
d
H
Review of correspondence from
Dr. Levisohn regarding IEE
Review of correspondence from
client regarding behavior
Telephone communication with
client
Telephone communication with
Dr. Levisohn regarding IEE
Preparation of correspondence to
0.875
04/08/14 CEM counsel
Intraoffice communication with
C. McAndrews regarding
04/09/14 HBK behavior
0.125
Intraoffice communication with
H.B. Konkler-Goldsmith
04/09/14 CEM regarding behavior
Page 28 of 104
ou
rs
C
la
im
or
m
ed
W
or
k
Pe
rf
ls
In
iti
a
D
at
e
Attachment to Mem. Op. [ECF No. 30]
0.875
275.00
250.00
240.63
218.75
175.00
Rate reduced to Laffey
(13-14); Fee reduced by
20% (Pre-11/6/14)
0.125
430.00
430.00
53.75
53.75
43.00
Fee reduced 20% (Pre11/6/14)
25.00
Rate reduced to Laffey
(13-14); Fee reduced by
20% (Pre-11/6/14)
50.00
Rate reduced to Laffey
(13-14); Fee reduced by
20% (Pre-11/6/14)
0.125
0.250
275.00
275.00
250.00
250.00
34.38
68.75
31.25
62.50
0.750
275.00
250.00
206.25
187.50
150.00
Rate reduced to Laffey
(13-14); Fee reduced by
20% (Pre-11/6/14)
0.250
240.00
240.00
60.00
60.00
48.00
Fee reduced 20% (Pre11/6/14)
275.00
Rate reduced to Laffey
(13-14); Fee reduced by
20% (Pre-11/6/14)
50.00
Rate reduced to Laffey
(13-14); Fee reduced by
20% (Pre-11/6/14)
1.375
0.250
275.00
275.00
250.00
250.00
378.13
68.75
343.75
62.50
Research regarding behavior
04/21/14 CEM assessment and intervention
0.125
0.125
275.00
250.00
34.38
31.25
25.00
Rate reduced to Laffey
(13-14); Fee reduced by
20% (Pre-11/6/14)
Review of file
materials/Intraoffice
communication regarding
04/23/14 HBK evaluation
0.250
0.250
430.00
430.00
107.50
107.50
86.00
Fee reduced 20% (Pre11/6/14)
Review of correspondence from
L. Levisohn regarding IEE
Review of correspondence from
D. Topolosky regarding IEE
Preparation of correspondence to
L. Levisohn and D. Topolosky
04/24/14 CEM regarding IEE
0.375
0.250
0.375
275.00
275.00
250.00
250.00
68.75
103.13
93.75
N
ot
es
ar
d
A
w
A
dj
us
te
d
ed
62.50
Fe
eC
re
di
te
d
H
Review of correspondences from
L. Levisohn regarding evaluation
Preparation of correspondence to
04/23/14 CEM L. Levisohn regarding same
0.250
Civil Action No. 15‐851 (ESH)
Fe
eC
la
im
ed
H
ou
rs
C
re
di
te
d
R
at
eC
la
im
ed
R
at
eC
re
di
te
d
Page 29 of 104
ou
rs
C
la
im
or
m
ed
W
or
k
Pe
rf
ls
In
iti
a
D
at
e
Attachment to Mem. Op. [ECF No. 30]
50.00
Rate reduced to Laffey
(13-14); Fee reduced by
20% (Pre-11/6/14)
75.00
Rate reduced to Laffey
(13-14); Fee reduced by
20% (Pre-11/6/14)
Review of correspondence from
A. McLaughlin regarding
observation
Preparation of correspondence to
A. McLaughlin regarding same
Telephone communication with
Dr. Topolosky regarding
psychoeducational testing
Preparation of correspondence to
Dr. Topolosky regarding same
Preparation of correspondence to
Dr. Levisohn and Dr. Topolosky
regarding IEE
Intraoffice communication with
04/28/14 CEM D. Dubose regarding IEE records 1.000
1.000
275.00
250.00
275.00
250.00
200.00
Rate reduced to Laffey
(13-14); Fee reduced by
20% (Pre-11/6/14)
Intraoffice communication with
C. McAndrews regarding IEE
04/29/14 HBK and behavior incidents
0.125
430.00
430.00
53.75
53.75
43.00
Fee reduced 20% (Pre11/6/14)
0.125
05/01/14 DD
Preparation of file materials for
Evaluator review
05/06/14 DD
Preparation of file materials and
correspondence to Evaluators
1.000
0.500
1.125
0.500
1.000
275.00
145.00
145.00
250.00
116.00
116.00
309.38
72.50
145.00
281.25
58.00
116.00
N
ot
es
ar
d
A
w
A
dj
us
te
d
Fe
eC
re
di
te
d
ed
Civil Action No. 15‐851 (ESH)
Fe
eC
la
im
ed
H
ou
rs
C
re
di
te
d
R
at
eC
la
im
ed
R
at
eC
re
di
te
d
H
Review of correspondence from
A. McLaughlin regarding
observation
Preparation of correspondence to
A. McLaughlin regarding same
Review of correspondence from
D. Topolosky and Dr. Levisohn
regarding IEE and rate
Preparation of correspondence to
D. Topolosky and Dr. Levisohn
regarding same
Preparation of correspondence to
D. Topolosky regarding IEE
Authorization
Intraoffice communication with
H.B. Konkler-Goldsmith
regarding IEE and behavior
incidents
Review of correspondences from
Dr. Levisohn regarding student
information and rate
Preparation of correspondence to
1.125
04/29/14 CEM Dr. Levisohn regarding same
Telephone communication with
A. McLaughlin regarding
05/06/14 CEM observation
Intraoffice communication with
C. McAndrews regarding rate
05/07/14 HBK approval
Page 30 of 104
ou
rs
C
la
im
or
m
ed
W
or
k
Pe
rf
ls
In
iti
a
D
at
e
Attachment to Mem. Op. [ECF No. 30]
225.00
Rate reduced to Laffey
(13-14); Fee reduced by
20% (Pre-11/6/14)
46.40
Rate reduced to 75%
USAO; Fee reduced by
20% (Pre-11/6/14)
92.80
Rate reduced to 75%
USAO; Fee reduced by
20% (Pre-11/6/14)
0.125
0.125
275.00
250.00
34.38
31.25
25.00
Rate reduced to Laffey
(13-14); Fee reduced by
20% (Pre-11/6/14)
0.125
0.125
430.00
430.00
53.75
53.75
43.00
Fee reduced 20% (Pre11/6/14)
Preparation of correspondence to
A. McLaughlin regarding
05/08/14 CEM observation
0.125
05/15/14 DD
Telephone communication with
client
0.125
0.125
Telephone communication with
client regarding cause of action,
05/15/14 CEM evaluations and behavior
0.375
Telephone communications with
client regarding testing and
05/23/14 CEM transportation
0.500
Telephone communications with
client regarding transportation to
05/27/14 CEM IEE
0.875
0.625
0.125
0.125
0.125
0.375
0.500
0.875
275.00
275.00
275.00
145.00
275.00
275.00
275.00
250.00
250.00
250.00
116.00
250.00
250.00
250.00
171.88
34.38
34.38
18.13
103.13
137.50
240.63
156.25
31.25
31.25
14.50
93.75
125.00
218.75
N
ot
es
ar
d
A
w
A
dj
us
te
d
Fe
eC
re
di
te
d
ed
Civil Action No. 15‐851 (ESH)
Fe
eC
la
im
ed
H
ou
rs
C
re
di
te
d
R
at
eC
la
im
ed
R
at
eC
re
di
te
d
H
Telephone communication with
A. McLaughlin regarding
observation
Intraoffice communication with
H.B. Konkler-Goldsmith
regarding rate approval
Review of correspondence from
D. Topolosky and L. Levisohn
regarding IEE
Preparation of correspondence to
D. Topolosky and L. Levisohn
regarding same
Review of correspondence from
A. McLaughlin regarding School
0.625
05/07/14 CEM District contact
Intraoffice communication with
H.B. Konkler-Goldsmith
05/12/14 CEM regarding IEE rate
Page 31 of 104
ou
rs
C
la
im
or
m
ed
W
or
k
Pe
rf
ls
In
iti
a
D
at
e
Attachment to Mem. Op. [ECF No. 30]
125.00
Rate reduced to Laffey
(13-14); Fee reduced by
20% (Pre-11/6/14)
25.00
Rate reduced to Laffey
(13-14); Fee reduced by
20% (Pre-11/6/14)
25.00
Rate reduced to Laffey
(13-14); Fee reduced by
20% (Pre-11/6/14)
11.60
Rate reduced to 75%
USAO; Fee reduced by
20% (Pre-11/6/14)
75.00
Rate reduced to Laffey
(13-14); Fee reduced by
20% (Pre-11/6/14)
100.00
Rate reduced to Laffey
(13-14); Fee reduced by
20% (Pre-11/6/14)
175.00
Rate reduced to Laffey
(13-14); Fee reduced by
20% (Pre-11/6/14)
Telephone communication with
05/28/14 CEM client regarding IEE
0.125
0.125
275.00
250.00
34.38
31.25
25.00
Rate reduced to Laffey
(13-14); Fee reduced by
20% (Pre-11/6/14)
Review of file
materials/Intraoffice
communication regarding
05/29/14 HBK evaluation
0.125
0.125
430.00
430.00
53.75
53.75
43.00
Fee reduced 20% (Pre11/6/14)
Review of file
materials/Intraoffice
communication regarding
05/29/14 DCM evaluation issues
0.125
0.125
450.00
450.00
56.25
56.25
45.00
Fee reduced 20% (Pre11/6/14)
Research regarding
transportation
Preparation of correspondence to
05/30/14 CEM client regarding same
0.750
Review of correspondence from
client
Investigate transportation
Telephone communication with
client
Preparation of correspondence to
client
Telephone communication with
1.250
06/02/14 CEM UPS regarding lost package
Preparation for, travel to and
attendance at client meeting
regarding transportation
Telephone communications with
A. McLaughlin regarding
observation
Preparation of correspondence to
06/03/14 CEM A. McLaughlin regarding same 1.375
Telephone communication with
06/10/14 CEM client regarding placement
Intraoffice communication with
C. McAndrews regarding
06/11/14 HBK placement
Intraoffice communication with
H.B. Konkler-Goldsmith
06/11/14 CEM regarding placement
0.125
06/17/14 FA
0.375
0.750
1.250
0.875
0.125
275.00
275.00
275.00
275.00
275.00
250.00
250.00
255.00
255.00
255.00
103.13
206.25
343.75
378.13
34.38
93.75
187.50
318.75
223.13
31.88
N
ot
es
ar
d
A
w
A
dj
us
te
d
Fe
eC
re
di
te
d
Fe
eC
la
im
ed
Civil Action No. 15‐851 (ESH)
75.00
Rate reduced to Laffey
(13-14); Fee reduced by
20% (Pre-11/6/14)
150.00
Rate reduced to Laffey
(13-14); Fee reduced by
20% (Pre-11/6/14)
255.00
Rate reduced to Laffey
(14-15); Fee reduced by
20% (Pre-11/6/14)
178.50
Hours reduced (travel);
Rate reduced to Laffey
(14-15); Fee reduced
20% (Pre-11/6/14)
25.50
Rate reduced to Laffey
(14-15); Fee reduced by
20% (Pre-11/6/14)
0.125
0.125
275.00
255.00
34.38
31.88
25.50
Rate reduced to Laffey
(14-15); Fee reduced by
20% (Pre-11/6/14)
0.125
0.125
430.00
430.00
53.75
53.75
43.00
Fee reduced 20% (Pre11/6/14)
25.50
Rate reduced to Laffey
(14-15); Fee reduced by
20% (Pre-11/6/14)
51.00
Rate reduced to Laffey
(14-15); Fee reduced by
20% (Pre-11/6/14)
34.80
Rate reduced to 75%
USAO; Fee reduced by
20% (Pre-11/6/14)
0.125
Review of correspondence from
A. McLaughlin regarding
observation
Preparation of correspondence to
0.250
06/16/14 CEM A. McLaughlin
Correspondence with client
regarding Dr. Levisohn
evaluation forms
ed
H
ou
rs
C
re
di
te
d
R
at
eC
la
im
ed
R
at
eC
re
di
te
d
H
Telephone communications with
client regarding transportation
Intraoffice communication with
H.B. Konkler-Goldsmith and
D.C. McAndrews regarding
05/29/14 CEM same
0.375
Intraoffice communication with
06/09/14 CEM F. Abdul regarding IEE forms
Page 32 of 104
ou
rs
C
la
im
or
m
ed
W
or
k
Pe
rf
ls
In
iti
a
D
at
e
Attachment to Mem. Op. [ECF No. 30]
0.375
0.125
0.250
0.375
275.00
275.00
145.00
255.00
255.00
116.00
34.38
68.75
54.38
31.88
63.75
43.50
Telephone communications with
client regarding IEE
06/18/14 CEM transportation
0.250
Arrange transportation
Telephone communication with
client
Telephone communication with
Taxi company regarding
transportation
Preparation of correspondence to
1.625
06/19/14 CEM client
Intraoffice communication with
H.B. Konkler-Goldsmith
regarding IEE and observation
Preparation of correspondence to
A. McLaughlin regarding
06/25/14 CEM observation
0.250
Review of correspondence from
A. McLaughlin regarding
observation
Intraoffice communication with
07/01/14 CEM F. Abdul regarding observation 0.250
07/02/14 FA
Intraoffice communication with
F. Abdul regarding ESY
07/02/14 CEM schedule
07/03/14 FA
Telephone communication with
client
0.125
0.125
0.125
1.375
0.250
1.625
0.250
0.250
0.125
0.125
0.125
275.00
275.00
275.00
275.00
275.00
145.00
275.00
145.00
255.00
255.00
255.00
255.00
255.00
116.00
255.00
116.00
378.13
68.75
446.88
68.75
68.75
18.13
34.38
18.13
350.63
63.75
414.38
63.75
63.75
14.50
31.88
14.50
N
ot
es
ar
d
A
w
A
dj
us
te
d
Fe
eC
re
di
te
d
ed
Civil Action No. 15‐851 (ESH)
Fe
eC
la
im
ed
H
ou
rs
C
re
di
te
d
R
at
eC
la
im
ed
R
at
eC
re
di
te
d
H
Intraoffice communication with
F. Abdul regarding UPS delivery
Review of correspondences from
client regarding ESY,
observation and summer
transportation
Preparation of correspondences
to client regarding same
Review of correspondences from
A. McLaughlin regarding
observation
Preparation of correspondences
to A. McLaughlin regarding
same
Intraoffice communication with
H.B. Konkler-Goldsmith
1.375
06/17/14 CEM regarding IEE
Telephone communication with
client
Page 33 of 104
ou
rs
C
la
im
or
m
ed
W
or
k
Pe
rf
ls
In
iti
a
D
at
e
Attachment to Mem. Op. [ECF No. 30]
280.50
Rate reduced to Laffey
(14-15); Fee reduced by
20% (Pre-11/6/14)
51.00
Rate reduced to Laffey
(14-15); Fee reduced by
20% (Pre-11/6/14)
331.50
Rate reduced to Laffey
(14-15); Fee reduced by
20% (Pre-11/6/14)
51.00
Rate reduced to Laffey
(14-15); Fee reduced by
20% (Pre-11/6/14)
51.00
Rates reduced to Laffey
(14-15); Fee reduced by
20% (Pre-11/6/14)
11.60
Rate reduced to 75%
USAO; Fee reduced by
20% (Pre-11/6/14)
25.50
Rates reduced to Laffey
(14-15); Fee reduced by
20% (Pre-11/6/14)
11.60
Rate reduced to 75%
USAO; Fee reduced by
20% (Pre-11/6/14)
0.250
Review of correspondence from
A. McLaughlin regarding ESY
observation
Telephone communication with
client
Preparation of correspondence to
07/09/14 CEM client
0.375
Review of correspondence from
client
Preparation of correspondence to
07/10/14 CEM client
0.375
Intraoffice communication with
C. McAndrews regarding
07/11/14 HBK services
0.125
Review of correspondence from
client regarding ESY
Preparation of correspondence to
A. McLaughlin regarding ESY
observation
Intraoffice communication with
H.B. Konkler-Goldsmith
0.500
07/11/14 CEM regarding services
Review of correspondence from
client regarding new contact
07/15/14 CEM information
0.125
Review of correspondence from
A. McLaughlin regarding
observation
Preparation of correspondence to
07/16/14 CEM A. McLaughlin regarding same 0.125
Intraoffice communication with
07/17/14 CEM F. Abdul regarding UPS
07/18/14 FA
Preparation of file materials
0.125
0.125
Review of correspondence from
client regarding new contact
information
Preparation of correspondence to
07/21/14 CEM client regarding same
0.125
0.250
0.250
0.375
275.00
275.00
275.00
255.00
255.00
255.00
68.75
68.75
103.13
63.75
63.75
95.63
N
ot
es
ar
d
A
w
A
dj
us
te
d
Fe
eC
re
di
te
d
ed
Civil Action No. 15‐851 (ESH)
Fe
eC
la
im
ed
H
ou
rs
C
re
di
te
d
R
at
eC
la
im
ed
R
at
eC
re
di
te
d
H
Intraoffice communication with
F. Abdul regarding ESY
observation
Correspondence with A.
McLaughlin regarding same
Review of correspondence from
A. McLaughlin regarding
0.250
07/03/14 CEM observation
Telephone communication with
client regarding placement and
07/08/14 CEM ESY
Page 34 of 104
ou
rs
C
la
im
or
m
ed
W
or
k
Pe
rf
ls
In
iti
a
D
at
e
Attachment to Mem. Op. [ECF No. 30]
51.00
Rate reduced to Laffey
(14-15); Fee reduced by
20% (Pre-11/6/14)
51.00
Rate reduced to Laffey
(14-15); Fee reduced by
20% (Pre-11/6/14)
76.50
Rate reduced to Laffey
(14-15); Fee reduced by
20% (Pre-11/6/14)
0.375
275.00
255.00
103.13
95.63
76.50
Rate reduced to Laffey
(14-15); Fee reduced by
20% (Pre-11/6/14)
0.125
430.00
430.00
53.75
53.75
43.00
Fee reduced 20% (Pre11/6/14)
102.00
Rate reduced to Laffey
(14-15); Fee reduced by
20% (Pre-11/6/14)
25.50
Rate reduced to Laffey
(14-15); Fee reduced by
20% (Pre-11/6/14)
25.50
Rate reduced to Laffey
(14-15); Fee reduced by
20% (Pre-11/6/14)
25.50
Rate reduced to Laffey
(14-15); Fee reduced by
20% (Pre-11/6/14)
11.60
Rate reduced to 75%
USAO; Fee reduced by
20% (Pre-11/6/14)
25.50
Rate reduced to Laffey
(14-15); Fee reduced by
20% (Pre-11/6/14)
0.500
0.125
0.125
0.125
0.125
0.125
275.00
275.00
275.00
275.00
145.00
275.00
255.00
255.00
255.00
255.00
116.00
255.00
137.50
34.38
34.38
34.38
18.13
34.38
127.50
31.88
31.88
31.88
14.50
31.88
Intraoffice communication with
07/23/14 HBK C. McAndrews regarding IEEs
Intraoffice communication with
H.B. Konkler-Goldsmith
07/24/14 CEM regarding IEEs
Telephone communication with
07/31/14 CEM client regarding placement
Intraoffice communication with
H.B. Konkler-Goldsmith
08/01/14 CEM regarding residency
0.125
0.250
0.125
Preparation of correspondence to
08/05/14 CEM L. Levisohn regarding evaluation 0.125
Review of correspondence from
Dr. Levisohn regarding IEE
Preparation of correspondence to
Dr. Levisohn regarding same
Preparation of correspondence to
A. McLaughlin regarding
observation
Intraoffice communication with
H.B. Konkler-Goldsmith
0.500
08/06/14 CEM regarding enrollment
Review of correspondence from
08/07/14 CEM A. McLaughlin regarding IEE
0.125
0.125
0.125
0.250
0.125
0.125
0.500
0.125
430.00
275.00
275.00
275.00
275.00
275.00
275.00
430.00
255.00
255.00
255.00
255.00
255.00
255.00
53.75
34.38
68.75
34.38
34.38
137.50
34.38
31.88
63.75
31.88
31.88
127.50
31.88
N
ot
es
ar
d
A
w
A
dj
us
te
d
ed
53.75
Fe
eC
re
di
te
d
H
0.125
Civil Action No. 15‐851 (ESH)
Fe
eC
la
im
ed
H
ou
rs
C
re
di
te
d
R
at
eC
la
im
ed
R
at
eC
re
di
te
d
Page 35 of 104
ou
rs
C
la
im
or
m
ed
W
or
k
Pe
rf
ls
In
iti
a
D
at
e
Attachment to Mem. Op. [ECF No. 30]
43.00
Fee reduced 20% (Pre11/6/14)
25.50
Rates reduced to Laffey
(14-15); Fee reduced by
20% (Pre-11/6/14)
51.00
Rate reduced to Laffey
(14-15); Fee reduced by
20% (Pre-11/6/14)
25.50
Rate reduced to Laffey
(14-15); Fee reduced by
20% (Pre-11/6/14)
25.50
Rate reduced to Laffey
(14-15); Fee reduced by
20% (Pre-11/6/14)
102.00
Rate reduced to Laffey
(14-15); Fee reduced by
20% (Pre-11/6/14)
25.50
Rate reduced to Laffey
(14-15); Fee reduced by
20% (Pre-11/6/14)
Preparation of correspondence to
A. McLaughlin regarding IEE
Intraoffice communication with
H.B. Konkler-Goldsmith
0.250
08/08/14 CEM regarding enrollment
0.250
275.00
255.00
68.75
63.75
51.00
Rate reduced to Laffey
(14-15); Fee reduced by
20% (Pre-11/6/14)
Intraoffice communication with
08/26/14 HBK C. McAndrews regarding IEE
0.125
430.00
430.00
53.75
53.75
43.00
Fee reduced 20% (Pre11/6/14)
51.00
Rate reduced to Laffey
(14-15); Fee reduced by
20% (Pre-11/6/14)
Review of IEE Report
Intraoffice communication with
H.B. Konkler-Goldsmith
08/26/14 CEM regarding IEE
0.125
0.250
0.250
275.00
255.00
68.75
63.75
N
ot
es
ar
d
A
w
A
dj
us
te
d
ed
Fe
eC
re
di
te
d
H
Civil Action No. 15‐851 (ESH)
Fe
eC
la
im
ed
H
ou
rs
C
re
di
te
d
R
at
eC
la
im
ed
R
at
eC
re
di
te
d
Page 36 of 104
ou
rs
C
la
im
or
m
ed
W
or
k
Pe
rf
ls
In
iti
a
D
at
e
Attachment to Mem. Op. [ECF No. 30]
Telephone communication with
Dr. Levisohn regarding IEE
Preparation of correspondences
to client regarding enrollment
and transportation
Review of correspondence from
client regarding same
Review of correspondence from
Dr. Levisohn regarding IEE
Preparation of correspondence to
Dr. Levisohn regarding same
Preparation of correspondence to
A. McLaughlin regarding
0.750
08/27/14 CEM observation
0.750
275.00
255.00
206.25
191.25
153.00
Rate reduced to Laffey
(14-15); Fee reduced by
20% (Pre-11/6/14)
Intraoffice communication with
C. McAndrews regarding Due
08/28/14 HBK Process Complaint
0.125
430.00
430.00
53.75
53.75
43.00
Fee reduced 20% (Pre11/6/14)
382.50
Rate reduced to Laffey
(14-15); Fee reduced by
20% (Pre-11/6/14)
102.00
Rate reduced to Laffey
(14-15); Fee reduced by
20% (Pre-11/6/14)
76.50
Rate reduced to Laffey
(14-15); Fee reduced by
20% (Pre-11/6/14)
178.50
Rate reduced to Laffey
(14-15); Fee reduced by
20% (Pre-11/6/14)
0.125
Review of correspondence from
A. McLaughlin regarding
observation
Review of correspondence from
client
Intraoffice communication with
H.B. Konkler-Goldsmith
regarding Due Process
Complaint
Telephone communication with
client
Preparation of correspondence to
1.875
08/28/14 CEM client
Review of correspondence from
A. McLaughlin regarding
observation
Preparation of correspondence to
A. McLaughlin regarding same
Review of correspondence from
08/29/14 CEM client
0.500
Telephone communication with
client regarding transportation
Preparation of correspondence to
0.375
09/02/14 CEM client regarding same
Review of correspondence from
A. McLaughlin regarding
observation
Telephone communication with
A. McLaughlin regarding same
Preparation of correspondence to
A. McLaughlin regarding
0.875
09/04/14 CEM observation
1.875
0.500
0.375
0.875
275.00
275.00
275.00
275.00
255.00
255.00
255.00
255.00
515.63
137.50
103.13
240.63
478.13
127.50
95.63
223.13
09/09/14 FA
Telephone communication with
client regarding Releases
09/10/14 FA
Telephone communication with
client regarding Records Release
Preparation of correspondence to
client regarding same
0.375
Review of file
materials/Intraoffice
communication with F. Abdul
09/19/14 CEM regarding Releases
09/22/14 FA
Preparation of file materials
regarding Release
0.125
0.125
0.125
0.125
Telephone communication with
09/24/14 CEM client regarding 30 Day Review 0.125
Telephone communication with
09/24/14 CEM client regarding 30 Day Review 0.125
Telephone communication with
DCPS Special Education
Compliance Office regarding
observation
Preparation of correspondence to
A. McLaughlin regarding
0.375
09/25/14 CEM observation
1.000
0.125
0.375
0.125
0.125
0.125
0.125
0.125
0.375
275.00
145.00
145.00
275.00
275.00
145.00
275.00
275.00
275.00
255.00
116.00
116.00
255.00
255.00
116.00
255.00
255.00
255.00
275.00
18.13
54.38
34.38
34.38
18.13
34.38
34.38
103.13
255.00
14.50
43.50
31.88
31.88
14.50
31.88
31.88
95.63
N
ot
es
ar
d
A
w
A
dj
us
te
d
Fe
eC
re
di
te
d
ed
Civil Action No. 15‐851 (ESH)
Fe
eC
la
im
ed
H
ou
rs
C
re
di
te
d
R
at
eC
la
im
ed
R
at
eC
re
di
te
d
H
Review of correspondences from
A. McLaughlin regarding
behavior and observation
Research regarding observation
policy
Preparation of correspondence to
A. McLaughlin regarding same
Review of correspondences from
client regarding IEP Meeting and
transportation
Preparation of correspondence to
1.000
09/08/14 CEM client regarding IEP Meeting
Telephone communication with
A. McLaughlin regarding
09/16/14 CEM observation
Page 37 of 104
ou
rs
C
la
im
or
m
ed
W
or
k
Pe
rf
ls
In
iti
a
D
at
e
Attachment to Mem. Op. [ECF No. 30]
204.00
Rate reduced to Laffey
(14-15); Fee reduced by
20% (Pre-11/6/14)
11.60
Rate reduced to 75%
USAO; Fee reduced by
20% (Pre-11/6/14)
34.80
Rate reduced to 75%
USAO; Fee reduced by
20% (Pre-11/6/14)
25.50
Rate reduced to Laffey
(14-15); Fee reduced by
20% (Pre-11/6/14)
25.50
Rate reduced to Laffey
(14-15); Fee reduced by
20% (Pre-11/6/14)
11.60
Rate reduced to 75%
USAO; Fee reduced by
20% (Pre-11/6/14)
25.50
Rate reduced to Laffey
(14-15); Fee reduced by
20% (Pre-11/6/14)
25.50
Rate reduced to Laffey
(14-15); Fee reduced by
20% (Pre-11/6/14)
76.50
Rate reduced to Laffey
(14-15); Fee reduced by
20% (Pre-11/6/14)
Review of correspondence from
client
Telephone communication with
client
Review of correspondence from
A. McLaughlin regarding
observation
Preparation of correspondence to
A. McLaughlin regarding same
Intraoffice communication with
H.B. Konkler-Goldsmith
1.000
10/01/14 CEM regarding same
Review of correspondence from
10/07/14 CEM L. Levisohn regarding IEE
0.125
Intraoffice communication with
H.B. Konkler-Goldsmith
regarding Due Process
Complaint
Preparation of correspondence to
0.250
10/08/14 CEM L. Levisohn regarding IEE
Review of correspondence from
10/09/14 CEM L. Levisohn regarding IEE
0.125
Review of correspondence from
L. Levisohn regarding IEE
Intraoffice communication with
10/15/14 CEM F. Abdul regarding same
0.375
Intraoffice communication with
10/21/14 CEM E. Gilmore regarding IEE
10/27/14 FA
Preparation of records
0.125
0.125
0.125
N
ot
es
ar
d
A
w
A
dj
us
te
d
Fe
eC
re
di
te
d
ed
Civil Action No. 15‐851 (ESH)
Fe
eC
la
im
ed
H
ou
rs
C
re
di
te
d
R
at
eC
la
im
ed
R
at
eC
re
di
te
d
H
Review of correspondence from
A. McLaughlin regarding
observation
Preparation of correspondence to
A. McLaughlin regarding same
Intraoffice communication with
H.B. Konkler-Goldsmith
0.250
09/28/14 CEM regarding observation
Intraoffice communication with
C. McAndrews regarding
10/01/14 HBK observation
0.125
Intraoffice communication with
10/17/14 CEM F. Abdul regarding IEE
Page 38 of 104
ou
rs
C
la
im
or
m
ed
W
or
k
Pe
rf
ls
In
iti
a
D
at
e
Attachment to Mem. Op. [ECF No. 30]
0.250
275.00
255.00
68.75
63.75
51.00
Rate reduced to Laffey
(14-15); Fee reduced by
20% (Pre-11/6/14)
0.125
430.00
430.00
53.75
53.75
43.00
Fee reduced 20% (Pre11/6/14)
204.00
Rate reduced to Laffey
(14-15); Fee reduced by
20% (Pre-11/6/14)
25.50
Rate reduced to Laffey
(14-15); Fee reduced by
20% (Pre-11/6/14)
51.00
Rate reduced to Laffey
(14-15); Fee reduced by
20% (Pre-11/6/14)
25.50
Rate reduced to Laffey
(14-15); Fee reduced by
20% (Pre-11/6/14)
76.50
Rate reduced to Laffey
(14-15); Fee reduced by
20% (Pre-11/6/14)
25.50
Rate reduced to Laffey
(14-15); Fee reduced by
20% (Pre-11/6/14)
25.50
Rate reduced to Laffey
(14-15); Fee reduced by
20% (Pre-11/6/14)
11.60
Rate reduced to 75%
USAO; Fee reduced by
20% (Pre-11/6/14)
1.000
0.125
0.250
0.125
0.375
0.125
0.125
0.125
275.00
275.00
275.00
275.00
275.00
275.00
275.00
145.00
255.00
255.00
255.00
255.00
255.00
255.00
255.00
116.00
275.00
34.38
68.75
34.38
103.13
34.38
34.38
18.13
255.00
31.88
63.75
31.88
95.63
31.88
31.88
14.50
0.375
275.00
255.00
103.13
N
ot
es
ar
d
A
w
A
dj
us
te
d
ed
95.63
Fe
eC
re
di
te
d
H
Review of correspondences from
D. Topolosky regarding IEE
Intraoffice communication with
F. Abdul regarding same
Preparation of correspondence to
10/27/14 CEM D. Topolosky regarding IEE
0.375
Civil Action No. 15‐851 (ESH)
Fe
eC
la
im
ed
H
ou
rs
C
re
di
te
d
R
at
eC
la
im
ed
R
at
eC
re
di
te
d
Page 39 of 104
ou
rs
C
la
im
or
m
ed
W
or
k
Pe
rf
ls
In
iti
a
D
at
e
Attachment to Mem. Op. [ECF No. 30]
76.50
Rate reduced to Laffey
(14-15); Fee reduced by
20% (Pre-11/6/14)
0.125
0.125
275.00
255.00
34.38
31.88
25.50
Rate reduced to Laffey
(14-15); Fee reduced by
20% (Pre-11/6/14)
0.125
0.125
185.00
131.00
23.13
16.38
16.38
Rate reduced to 85%
USAO
0.125
0.125
275.00
255.00
34.38
31.88
31.88
Rate reduced to Laffey
(14-15)
3.125
3.125
275.00
255.00
859.38
796.88
796.88
Rate reduced to Laffey
(14-15)
2.625
2.625
275.00
255.00
721.88
669.38
669.38
Rate reduced to Laffey
(14-15)
Preparation of Due Process
Complaint
Intraoffice communication with
H.B. Konkler-Goldsmith
regarding same
Review of correspondence from
client regarding IEP
Preparation of correspondence to
0.875
11/18/14 CEM client regarding same
0.875
275.00
255.00
240.63
223.13
223.13
Rate reduced to Laffey
(14-15)
Preparation of correspondence to
11/24/14 CEM client regarding IEP
0.125
0.125
275.00
255.00
34.38
31.88
31.88
Rate reduced to Laffey
(14-15)
0.125
275.00
255.00
34.38
31.88
31.88
0.125
275.00
255.00
34.38
31.88
31.88
0.500
0.500
275.00
255.00
137.50
127.50
127.50
0.625
0.625
275.00
255.00
171.88
159.38
159.38
Telephone communication with
11/03/14 CEM client
Intraoffice communication with
C. McAndrews regarding IEE
Intraoffice communication with
M. Clarke regarding
11/06/14 CEM communication with client
Review of file materials
regarding Due Process
11/14/14 CEM Complaint
11/06/14 MC
Telephone communication with
client
Preparation of Due Process
Complaint
Intraoffice communication with
H.B. Konkler-Goldsmith
regarding Due Process
11/17/14 CEM Complaint
Review of correspondence from
client regarding conference call
Preparation of correspondence to
0.125
11/25/14 CEM client regarding same
Review of correspondence from
11/25/14 CEM counsel
0.125
Telephone communication with
client regarding IEP
Intraoffice communication with
H.B. Konkler-Goldsmith
11/26/14 CEM regarding McKinney-Vento
Research regarding Mckinney12/03/14 CEM Vento Act
Rate reduced to Laffey
(14-15)
Rate reduced to Laffey
(14-15)
Rate reduced to Laffey
(14-15)
Rate reduced to Laffey
(14-15)
N
ot
es
ar
d
A
w
A
dj
us
te
d
ed
Fe
eC
re
di
te
d
H
Civil Action No. 15‐851 (ESH)
Fe
eC
la
im
ed
H
ou
rs
C
re
di
te
d
R
at
eC
la
im
ed
R
at
eC
re
di
te
d
Page 40 of 104
ou
rs
C
la
im
or
m
ed
W
or
k
Pe
rf
ls
In
iti
a
D
at
e
Attachment to Mem. Op. [ECF No. 30]
Preparation of Due Process
12/04/14 CEM Complaint
Review and revise Due Process
12/05/14 JTN Complaint
0.375
0.375
275.00
255.00
103.13
95.63
95.63
Rate reduced to Laffey
(14-15)
0.375
0.375
240.00
240.00
90.00
90.00
90.00
-
Intraoffice communication with
H.B. Konkler-Goldsmith
regarding Due Process
Complaint
0.125
0.125
230.00
230.00
28.75
28.75
28.75
-
Intraoffice communication with
C. McAndrews regarding Due
12/11/14 HBK Process Complaint
0.125
0.125
430.00
430.00
53.75
53.75
53.75
-
0.125
0.125
275.00
255.00
34.38
31.88
31.88
1.000
1.000
185.00
131.00
185.00
131.00
131.00
1.375
1.375
275.00
255.00
378.13
350.63
350.63
Rate reduced to Laffey
(14-15)
Rate reduced to 85%
USAO
Rate reduced to Laffey
(14-15)
0.250
0.250
275.00
255.00
68.75
63.75
63.75
Rate reduced to Laffey
(14-15)
12/11/14 JCL
Intraoffice communication with
H.B. Konkler-Goldsmith
regarding Due Process
12/11/14 CEM Complaint
Preparation of Due Process
12/16/14 MC
Complaint for filing
Preparation of Due Process
12/16/14 CEM Complaint
Review of file materials
regarding Hearing Officer
12/18/14 CEM assignment
Review of correspondence from
Hearing Officer Blount and
counsel regarding Prehearing
Conference and Due Process
Hearing
Preparation of correspondence to
Hearing Officer and counsel
regarding same
Telephone communication with
E. Castillo regarding RSM
Review of correspondence from
0.375
12/19/14 CEM E. Castillo regarding RSM
0.500
275.00
255.00
103.13
127.50
127.50
Hours reduced (RSM);
Rate reduced to Laffey
(14-15)
Review of initial Order and
Notice of Prehearing Conference
Intraoffice communication with
H.B. Konkler-Goldsmith and
D.C. McAndrews regarding
0.375
12/22/14 CEM scheduling
0.375
275.00
255.00
103.13
95.63
95.63
Rate reduced to Laffey
(14-15)
Review of correspondence from
E. Castillo regarding RSM
Preparation of correspondence to
E. Castillo regarding same
Intraoffice communication with
D.C. McAndrews and H.B.
Konkler-Goldsmith regarding
0.250
12/31/14 CEM regarding same
0.000
275.00
255.00
68.75
0.00
0.00
Hours reduced (RSM);
Rate reduced to Laffey
(14-15)
01/02/15 DCM Preparation for Due Process
0.375
450.00
450.00
168.75
168.75
168.75
-
0.375
N
ot
es
ar
d
A
w
A
dj
us
te
d
ed
Fe
eC
re
di
te
d
H
Intraoffice communication with
D.C. McAndrews regarding
scheduling
Telephone communication with
client
Review of correspondence from
Hearing Officer Blount
regarding scheduling
Preparation of correspondence to
Hearing Officer Blount
regarding same
Review of correspondence from
E. Castillo regarding same
Review of DCPS Response
Review of correspondence from
Hearing Officer regarding Due
1.125
01/02/15 CEM Process Hearing
Review of file materials
01/05/15 JH
regarding Due Process
0.125
Telephone communication with
01/05/15 MC
client
0.125
Civil Action No. 15‐851 (ESH)
Fe
eC
la
im
ed
H
ou
rs
C
re
di
te
d
R
at
eC
la
im
ed
R
at
eC
re
di
te
d
Page 41 of 104
ou
rs
C
la
im
or
m
ed
W
or
k
Pe
rf
ls
In
iti
a
D
at
e
Attachment to Mem. Op. [ECF No. 30]
1.125
275.00
255.00
309.38
286.88
286.88
0.125
185.00
131.00
23.13
16.38
16.38
0.125
185.00
131.00
23.13
16.38
16.38
Rate reduced to Laffey
(14-15)
Rate reduced to 85%
USAO
Rate reduced to 85%
USAO
Intraoffice communication with
D.C. McAndrews, J. Hardy
01/05/15 CEM regarding Prehearing Conference 0.125
0.125
275.00
255.00
34.38
31.88
31.88
Rate reduced to Laffey
(14-15)
Review of correspondences from
Hearing Officer and Notices
Review of correspondence from
counsel, M. Washington
Preparation for Due Process
01/06/15 DCM Review of records
0.625
0.625
450.00
450.00
281.25
281.25
281.25
-
0.250
185.00
131.00
46.25
32.75
32.75
Rate reduced to 85%
USAO
01/06/15 JH
Review of file
materials/Intraoffice
communication regarding file
contents
0.250
N
ot
es
ar
d
A
w
A
dj
us
te
d
ed
Fe
eC
re
di
te
d
H
Civil Action No. 15‐851 (ESH)
Fe
eC
la
im
ed
H
ou
rs
C
re
di
te
d
R
at
eC
la
im
ed
R
at
eC
re
di
te
d
Page 42 of 104
ou
rs
C
la
im
or
m
ed
W
or
k
Pe
rf
ls
In
iti
a
D
at
e
Attachment to Mem. Op. [ECF No. 30]
Review of Prehearing
Conference Order
Telephone communication with
client
Intraoffice communication with
J. Hardy regarding file
Intraoffice communication with
M. Clarke regarding file
Intraoffice communication with
J. Hardy regarding records
Review of correspondence from
E. Castillo regarding RSM
Preparation of correspondence to
E. Castillo regarding same
Review of correspondence from
counsel, M. Washington,
Hearing Officer Blount and D.C.
McAndrews regarding
Prehearing Conference and Due
Process Hearing
Intraoffice communication with
D.C. McAndrews regarding
residence
Preparation of correspondence to
1.250
01/06/15 CEM client
1.125
275.00
255.00
343.75
286.88
286.88
Hours reduced (RSM);
Rate reduced to Laffey
(14-15)
Intraoffice communication with
C. McAndrews regarding
01/07/15 HBK Resolution Meeting
0.125
0.000
430.00
430.00
53.75
0.00
0.00
Hours reduced (RSM)
Preparation of correspondence to
E. Castillo regarding RSM
Review of correspondence from
E. Castillo regarding same
Preparation of correspondence to
client
Preparation for, travel to and
attendance at RSM
Intraoffice communication with
H.B. Konkler-Goldsmith
regarding RSM
Research regarding
5.625
01/07/15 CEM transportation
0.000
275.00
255.00
1,546.88
0.00
0.00
-
01/08/15 DCM Preparation for Due Process
0.250
450.00
450.00
112.50
112.50
112.50
-
0.250
01/13/15 JH
Review of file materials
regarding school record and
Resolution Disposition form
N
ot
es
ar
d
A
w
A
dj
us
te
d
Fe
eC
re
di
te
d
ed
Civil Action No. 15‐851 (ESH)
Fe
eC
la
im
ed
H
ou
rs
C
re
di
te
d
R
at
eC
la
im
ed
R
at
eC
re
di
te
d
H
Review of correspondences from
colleague regarding resources
Preparation of correspondences
to colleague regarding same
Preparation of correspondence to
D. Hodges regarding residence
Intraoffice communication with
D.C. McAndrews regarding Due
Process Hearing
Preparation of correspondence to
1.000
01/08/15 CEM L. Levisohn regarding same
Review of records
01/12/15 DCM Preparation for Due Process
Preparation for Prehearing
Conference and Due Process
01/12/15 CEM Hearing
Telephone communication with
01/13/15 MC
client
Page 43 of 104
ou
rs
C
la
im
or
m
ed
W
or
k
Pe
rf
ls
In
iti
a
D
at
e
Attachment to Mem. Op. [ECF No. 30]
1.000
275.00
255.00
275.00
255.00
255.00
Rate reduced to Laffey
(14-15)
1.750
1.750
450.00
450.00
787.50
787.50
787.50
-
1.000
1.000
275.00
255.00
275.00
255.00
255.00
0.125
0.125
185.00
131.00
23.13
16.38
16.38
Rate reduced to Laffey
(14-15)
Rate reduced to 85%
USAO
0.125
0.000
185.00
131.00
23.13
0.00
0.00
Hours reduced (RSM)
N
ot
es
ar
d
A
w
A
dj
us
te
d
Fe
eC
re
di
te
d
ed
Civil Action No. 15‐851 (ESH)
Fe
eC
la
im
ou
rs
C
la
im
ed
H
ou
rs
C
re
di
te
d
R
at
eC
la
im
ed
R
at
eC
re
di
te
d
Page 44 of 104
H
or
m
ed
W
or
k
Pe
rf
ls
In
iti
a
D
at
e
Attachment to Mem. Op. [ECF No. 30]
Research regarding housing
Review of correspondence from
D. Hodges regarding client
communication
Preparation of correspondence to
D. Hodges regarding same
Review of correspondence from
A. Anokye regarding RSM
Intraoffice communication with
D.C. McAndrews regarding
same
Telephone communication with
client
Preparation of correspondence to
A. McLaughlin regarding Due
Process Hearing
Telephone communication with
Lindamood Bell regarding
evaluation
Review of correspondence from
Hearing Officer and counsel
regarding Prehearing Conference
Review of correspondence from
A. McLaughlin regarding Due
Process Hearing
Review of correspondence from
L. Levisohn regarding Due
1.625
01/13/15 CEM Process Hearing
1.500
275.00
255.00
446.88
382.50
382.50
Hours reduced (RSM);
Rate reduced to Laffey
(14-15)
Review of multiple emails from
prospective witnesses
Preparation of multiple emails to
prospective witnesses
Preparation for and attendance at
Prehearing Conference
Preparation of correspondence to
Dr. Levisohn
Preparation of Motion for
Continuance
Preparation of Witness Lists
Preparation of questions for Due
2.500
01/14/15 DCM Process
2.500
450.00
450.00
1,125.00
1,125.00
1,125.00
-
N
ot
es
ar
d
A
w
A
dj
us
te
d
ed
Fe
eC
re
di
te
d
H
Civil Action No. 15‐851 (ESH)
Fe
eC
la
im
ed
H
ou
rs
C
re
di
te
d
R
at
eC
la
im
ed
R
at
eC
re
di
te
d
Page 45 of 104
ou
rs
C
la
im
or
m
ed
W
or
k
Pe
rf
ls
In
iti
a
D
at
e
Attachment to Mem. Op. [ECF No. 30]
Intraoffice communications with
M. Clarke regarding
compensatory education
Intraoffice communication with
D.C. McAndrews regarding Due
Process Hearing
Review of correspondence from
Dr. Levisohn regarding same
Telephone communication with
Lindamood Bell regarding
evaluation
Review of correspondence from
counsel M. Washington,
regarding RSM disposition
Preparation of Motion
Review of Prehearing
Conference Order
Preparation of memorandum to
1.875
01/14/15 CEM file regarding same
1.500
275.00
255.00
515.63
382.50
382.50
Hours reduced (RSM);
Rate reduced to Laffey
(14-15)
Preparation of Motion for
Continuance
Review of correspondence from
Dr. Levisohn
Preparation of correspondence to
01/15/15 DCM Dr. Levisohn
0.375
0.375
450.00
450.00
168.75
168.75
168.75
-
0.250
0.250
185.00
131.00
46.25
32.75
32.75
Rate reduced to 85%
USAO
Intraoffice communication with
D.C. McAndrews regarding
Motions
Preparation of correspondence to
Hearing Officer regarding
Motion for Continuance
Review of correspondence from
Hearing Officer regarding same
Intraoffice communication with
01/15/15 CEM M. Clarke regarding evaluation 0.750
0.750
275.00
255.00
206.25
191.25
191.25
Rate reduced to Laffey
(14-15)
Preparation of correspondence to
School District regarding IEP
Review of correspondence from
counsel regarding transportation
Preparation of correspondence to
0.500
01/16/15 DCM counsel regarding same
0.500
450.00
450.00
225.00
225.00
225.00
-
01/15/15 MC
Intraoffice communication with
C. McAndrews regarding
Lindamood Bell testing
Telephone communication with
client
N
ot
es
ar
d
A
w
A
dj
us
te
d
Fe
eC
re
di
te
d
ed
Civil Action No. 15‐851 (ESH)
Fe
eC
la
im
ou
rs
C
la
im
ed
H
ou
rs
C
re
di
te
d
R
at
eC
la
im
ed
R
at
eC
re
di
te
d
Page 46 of 104
H
or
m
ed
W
or
k
Pe
rf
ls
In
iti
a
D
at
e
Attachment to Mem. Op. [ECF No. 30]
Review of correspondence from
K. Conaboy regarding Due
Process Hearing
Preparation of correspondence to
K. Conaboy regarding same
Telephone communications with
client regarding transportation
and evaluation
Intraoffice communications with
D.C. McAndrews regarding Due
Process Hearing and behavior
Telephone communication with
counsel, M. Washington,
regarding transportation
Preparation of correspondences
to counsel regarding same
Telephone communication with
Lindamood Bell regarding
evaluation
Preparation of correspondence to
C. Sandoval regarding IEP
Review of correspondence from
01/16/15 CEM counsel regarding transportation 2.375
2.375
275.00
255.00
653.13
605.63
605.63
Rate reduced to Laffey
(14-15)
Review of file
materials/Intraoffice
communication regarding
Lindamood Bell
Telephone communications with
client regarding transportation
and housing
Preparation of Motion to Correct
1.250
01/19/15 CEM Prehearing Conference Order
1.250
275.00
255.00
343.75
318.75
318.75
Rate reduced to Laffey
(14-15)
Review of Hearing Officer's
Order
Preparation of Motion to Correct
Order
Review of correspondence from
counsel, M. Washington
Preparation of correspondence to
0.375
01/20/15 DCM counsel
0.375
450.00
450.00
168.75
168.75
168.75
-
N
ot
es
ar
d
A
w
A
dj
us
te
d
Fe
eC
re
di
te
d
ed
Civil Action No. 15‐851 (ESH)
Fe
eC
la
im
ou
rs
C
la
im
ed
H
ou
rs
C
re
di
te
d
R
at
eC
la
im
ed
R
at
eC
re
di
te
d
Page 47 of 104
H
or
m
ed
W
or
k
Pe
rf
ls
In
iti
a
D
at
e
Attachment to Mem. Op. [ECF No. 30]
Preparation of correspondence to
A. McLaughlin regarding resume
Review of correspondences from
A. McLaughlin regarding same
and Due Process Hearing
Review of correspondences from
counsel, M. Washington,
regarding continuance and
Prehearing Conference Order
Telephone communication with
client regarding transportation
Review of correspondence from
Hearing Officer regarding Due
Process Hearing
Intraoffice communication with
D.C. McAndrews regarding
1.125
01/20/15 CEM same
1.125
275.00
255.00
309.38
286.88
286.88
Rate reduced to Laffey
(14-15)
Telephone communications with
counsel, M. Washington and C.
01/21/15 DCM McAndrews
0.250
0.250
450.00
450.00
112.50
112.50
112.50
-
0.250
275.00
255.00
68.75
63.75
63.75
Rate reduced to Laffey
(14-15)
0.125
450.00
450.00
56.25
56.25
56.25
-
Preparation of correspondence to
Hearing Officer regarding Due
Process Hearing
01/21/15 CEM Review of file materials
0.250
Review of correspondence from
01/22/15 DCM Hearing Officer
0.125
Telephone communications with
client regarding transportation
and reading
Intraoffice communication with
H.B. Konkler-Goldsmith
regarding residence
Intraoffice communications with
D.C. McAndrews regarding
resumes and transportation
Review of correspondences from
counsel, M. Washington,
regarding transportation and
records
Preparation of correspondences
to counsel regarding same
Review of correspondence from
Lindamood Bell regarding
evaluation
Review of correspondence from
Hearing Officer regarding Due
Process Hearing
Research regarding
transportation
Preparation of correspondence to
D. Douglas regarding Due
Process
Review of correspondence from
A. McLaughlin regarding same
Preparation of correspondence to
A. McLaughlin regarding Due
Process Hearing
Preparation of correspondence to
Dr. Levisohn regarding same
Preparation of correspondence to
client regarding reading
evaluation
Preparation of Intake for
2.750
01/22/15 CEM Reading Evaluation
Review of correspondence from
Hearing Officer regarding
Motion
Preparation of correspondence to
Hearing Officer regarding same
and scheduling
Preparation of correspondence to
K. Conaboy and D. Douglas
regarding Due Process Hearing
Review of correspondence from
0.625
01/23/15 CEM D. Douglas regarding same
Intraoffice communication with
D.C. McAndrews regarding
01/26/15 CEM witnesses
0.125
Review of records
01/27/15 DCM Preparation for hearing
0.750
N
ot
es
ar
d
A
w
A
dj
us
te
d
Fe
eC
re
di
te
d
ed
Civil Action No. 15‐851 (ESH)
Fe
eC
la
im
ou
rs
C
la
im
ed
H
ou
rs
C
re
di
te
d
R
at
eC
la
im
ed
R
at
eC
re
di
te
d
Page 48 of 104
H
or
m
ed
W
or
k
Pe
rf
ls
In
iti
a
D
at
e
Attachment to Mem. Op. [ECF No. 30]
2.500
275.00
255.00
756.25
637.50
637.50
Hours reduced (travel);
Rate reduced to Laffey
(13-14); Fee reduced
20% (Pre-11/6/14)
0.625
275.00
255.00
171.88
159.38
159.38
Rate reduced to Laffey
(14-15)
0.125
275.00
255.00
34.38
31.88
31.88
Rate reduced to Laffey
(14-15)
0.750
450.00
450.00
337.50
337.50
337.50
-
01/27/15 AS
Intraoffice communication with
C. McAndrews regarding Due
Process Hearing
Telephone communication with
client regarding same
N
ot
es
ar
d
A
w
A
dj
us
te
d
ed
Fe
eC
re
di
te
d
H
0.250
Civil Action No. 15‐851 (ESH)
Fe
eC
la
im
ed
H
ou
rs
C
re
di
te
d
R
at
eC
la
im
ed
R
at
eC
re
di
te
d
Page 49 of 104
ou
rs
C
la
im
or
m
ed
W
or
k
Pe
rf
ls
In
iti
a
D
at
e
Attachment to Mem. Op. [ECF No. 30]
0.250
155.00
116.00
38.75
29.00
29.00
Rate reduced to 75%
USAO
Review of Order granting
continuance
Review of Prehearing
Conference Order
Preparation of correspondence to
A. McLaughlin regarding Due
Process Hearing
Intraoffice communication with
D.C. McAndrews regarding
witnesses
Preparation of memorandum to
D.C. McAndrews and J. Hardy
regarding same
Review of correspondence from
Dr. Levisohn regarding Due
Process Hearing
Preparation of correspondence to
Dr. Levisohn regarding same
Preparation of correspondence to
D. Douglas regarding Due
Process Hearing
Intraoffice communication with
2.000
01/27/15 CEM A. Sauer regarding same
Intraoffice communication
regarding Due Process Hearing
0.125
01/28/15 HBK and residence
2.000
275.00
255.00
550.00
510.00
510.00
Rate reduced to Laffey
(14-15)
0.125
430.00
430.00
53.75
53.75
53.75
-
Intraoffice communications with
H.B. Konkler-Goldsmith, D.C.
McAndrews and C. McAndrews
regarding Due Process Hearing
and residence
0.250
0.250
155.00
116.00
38.75
29.00
29.00
Rate reduced to 75%
USAO
Intraoffice communication a A.
Sauer regarding Due Process
Hearing
Review of correspondence from
A. McLaughlin regarding
testimony
Intraoffice communication with
H.B. Konkler-Goldsmith, D.C.
McAndrews and A. Sauer
regarding Due Process Hearing
0.375
01/28/15 CEM and residence
0.375
275.00
255.00
103.13
95.63
95.63
Rate reduced to Laffey
(14-15)
01/28/15 AS
N
ot
es
ar
d
A
w
A
dj
us
te
d
ed
Fe
eC
re
di
te
d
H
Civil Action No. 15‐851 (ESH)
Fe
eC
la
im
ed
H
ou
rs
C
re
di
te
d
R
at
eC
la
im
ed
R
at
eC
re
di
te
d
Page 50 of 104
ou
rs
C
la
im
or
m
ed
W
or
k
Pe
rf
ls
In
iti
a
D
at
e
Attachment to Mem. Op. [ECF No. 30]
Telephone communications with
client regarding placement
Telephone communication with
Fairfax County Coordinated
Services Planning regarding
enrollment
0.625
0.625
155.00
116.00
96.88
72.50
72.50
Rate reduced to 75%
USAO
Telephone communications with
client regarding contact
information and placement
Telephone communication with
Fairfax County Coordinated
Services Planning regarding
enrollment
Intraoffice communication with
A. Sauer regarding same
Telephone communication with
D. Hodges regarding supports
Review of correspondence from
Hearing Officer regarding
Motions
Review of correspondence from
1.250
01/29/15 CEM client regarding transportation
1.250
275.00
255.00
343.75
318.75
318.75
Rate reduced to Laffey
(14-15)
0.375
0.375
275.00
255.00
103.13
95.63
95.63
0.125
0.125
155.00
116.00
19.38
14.50
14.50
0.250
0.250
275.00
255.00
68.75
63.75
63.75
0.125
0.125
155.00
116.00
19.38
14.50
14.50
0.125
0.125
275.00
255.00
34.38
31.88
31.88
Rate reduced to Laffey
(14-15)
Rate reduced to 75%
USAO
Rate reduced to Laffey
(14-15)
0.125
0.125
155.00
116.00
19.38
14.50
14.50
Rate reduced to 75%
USAO
01/29/15 AS
Telephone communication with
client
Intraoffice communication with
A. Sauer regarding client
02/03/15 CEM communication
Telephone communication with
02/04/15 AS
client
Telephone communication with
client
Intraoffice communication with
A. Sauer regarding
communication with client,
02/04/15 CEM transportation
Telephone communication with
02/05/15 AS
client
Review of phone message
02/05/15 CEM regarding transportation
02/06/15 AS
Telephone communication with
client regarding transportation
Rate reduced to Laffey
(14-15)
Rate reduced to 75%
USAO
02/06/15 JH
02/07/15 DCM Review of records
0.130
275.00
255.00
206.25
N
ot
es
ar
d
A
w
A
dj
us
te
d
ed
33.15
Fe
eC
re
di
te
d
H
Civil Action No. 15‐851 (ESH)
Fe
eC
la
im
ed
H
ou
rs
C
re
di
te
d
R
at
eC
la
im
ed
R
at
eC
re
di
te
d
Pe
k
W
or
Intraoffice communications with
A. Sauer regarding
transportation
Review of correspondence from
A. Anokye regarding IEP
Meeting
Intraoffice communications with
D.C. McAndrews regarding
same and conference call
Review of correspondence from
0.750
02/06/15 CEM client regarding IEP Meeting
Review of file materials
regarding Invitation to IEP and
Resolution Meeting
Page 51 of 104
ou
rs
C
la
im
or
m
ed
rf
ls
In
iti
a
D
at
e
Attachment to Mem. Op. [ECF No. 30]
33.15
Hours reduced (IEP);
Rate reduced to Laffey
(14-15)
0.125
0.000
185.00
131.00
23.13
0.00
0.00
Hours reduced (RSM);
Rate reduced to 85%
USAO
0.750
0.750
450.00
450.00
337.50
337.50
337.50
-
Hours reduced (IEP);
Rate reduced to Laffey
(14-15)
Intraoffice communication with
D.C. McAndrews regarding
records and meeting
Intraoffice communication with
A. Sauer regarding IEP meeting
Research regarding IEPs
Intraoffice communication with
D.C. McAndrews regarding IEP
Preparation of correspondence to
1.250
02/07/15 CEM counsel
Intraoffice communication with
D.C. McAndrews regarding
02/08/15 CEM records
0.125
Telephone communication with
02/09/15 AS
client
0.250
0.000
275.00
255.00
343.75
0.00
0.00
0.125
275.00
255.00
34.38
31.88
31.88
0.250
155.00
116.00
38.75
29.00
29.00
Rate reduced to Laffey
(14-15)
Rate reduced to 75%
USAO
Intraoffice communication with
D.C. McAndrews regarding IEP
Meeting and residence
Intraoffice communication with
A. Sauer regarding IEP Meeting
Review of correspondence from
client
Review of correspondence from
counsel
Preparation of correspondence to
1.500
02/09/15 CEM counsel
0.000
275.00
255.00
412.50
0.00
0.00
Hours reduced (IEP);
Rate reduced to Laffey
(14-15)
Preparation for resolution
session
Telephone communication with
client
Review of records
Review of correspondence from
0.750
02/09/15 DCM counsel, M. Washington
0.000
450.00
450.00
337.50
0.00
0.00
Hours reduced (RSM)
0.125
430.00
430.00
53.75
53.75
53.75
450.00
450.00
337.50
337.50
337.50
N
ot
-
0.750
es
ar
d
A
w
A
dj
us
te
d
ed
Fe
eC
re
di
te
d
H
0.125
Civil Action No. 15‐851 (ESH)
Fe
eC
la
im
Pe
k
W
or
Intraoffice communication with
C. McAndrews regarding
02/10/15 HBK procedure
ed
H
ou
rs
C
re
di
te
d
R
at
eC
la
im
ed
R
at
eC
re
di
te
d
ou
rs
C
la
im
or
m
ed
Page 52 of 104
rf
ls
In
iti
a
D
at
e
Attachment to Mem. Op. [ECF No. 30]
Review of correspondences from
counsel, M. Washington
Review of correspondence from
client
Preparation of correspondence to
client
Preparation of correspondence to
0.750
02/10/15 DCM counsel
Telephone communication with
02/10/15 AS
client regarding status
0.125
Review of file materials
02/10/15 JH
regarding Custody Order
0.125
0.125
155.00
116.00
19.38
14.50
14.50
0.125
185.00
131.00
23.13
16.38
16.38
Rate reduced to 75%
USAO
Rate reduced to 85%
USAO
Review of correspondence from
counsel, M. Washington,
regarding records
Intraoffice communications with
D.C. McAndrews regarding
same
Telephone communication with
client regarding meetings
Intraoffice communication with
H.B. Konkler-Goldsmith
0.625
02/10/15 CEM regarding procedure
0.625
275.00
255.00
171.88
159.38
159.38
Rate reduced to Laffey
(14-15)
Review of correspondence from
counsel, M. Washington
Preparation of correspondence to
counsel
0.250
02/11/15 DCM Correspondence with client
0.250
450.00
450.00
112.50
112.50
112.50
-
Review of correspondence from
counsel, M. Washington,
regarding records
Intraoffice communication with
D.C. McAndrews regarding
same, IEP and Resolution
0.375
02/11/15 CEM Meeting
0.125
275.00
255.00
103.13
31.88
31.88
Hours reduced (RSM);
Rate reduced to Laffey
(14-15)
Preparation for, travel to and
attendance at Resolution
Meeting
02/12/15 DCM Review of records
0.000
450.00
450.00
4,500.00
0.00
0.00
Hours reduced (RSM)
Correspondence with client
Review of records
Preparation of witness sheets for
02/13/15 DCM deposition
0.375
10.000
0.375
450.00
450.00
168.75
168.75
168.75
-
Intraoffice communication with
D.C. McAndrews regarding
02/13/15 CEM Resolution Meeting
0.000
275.00
255.00
34.38
0.00
0.00
-
0.125
Intraoffice communication with
D.C. McAndrews regarding
reading, IEP Meeting and Due
02/14/15 CEM Process Hearing
N
ot
es
ar
d
A
w
A
dj
us
te
d
ed
Fe
eC
re
di
te
d
H
Civil Action No. 15‐851 (ESH)
Fe
eC
la
im
ed
H
ou
rs
C
re
di
te
d
R
at
eC
la
im
ed
R
at
eC
re
di
te
d
Page 53 of 104
ou
rs
C
la
im
or
m
ed
W
or
k
Pe
rf
ls
In
iti
a
D
at
e
Attachment to Mem. Op. [ECF No. 30]
1.250
0.500
275.00
255.00
343.75
127.50
127.50
Hours reduced (IEP);
Rate reduced to Laffey
(14-15)
Review of correspondence from
colleague regarding homeless
services
Intraoffice communication with
D.C. McAndrews regarding
02/16/15 CEM same
0.125
0.000
275.00
255.00
34.38
0.00
0.00
Hours reduced (noncompensable)
Telephone communication with
client
Telephone communication with
02/18/15 DCM N. Gregerson
0.375
0.375
450.00
450.00
168.75
168.75
168.75
-
Intraoffice communication with
A. Sauer regarding OSSE
contacts
Intraoffice communication with
D.C. McAndrews regarding
reading intervention
Review of correspondence from
colleague regarding McKinneyVento
Preparation of correspondence to
0.375
02/18/15 CEM colleague regarding same
0.375
275.00
255.00
103.13
95.63
95.63
Rate reduced to Laffey
(14-15)
Preparation of correspondence to
L. Levisohn
Preparation of correspondence to
A. McLaughlin
Telephone communications with
client
Preparation of correspondence to
counsel, M. Washington
Review of correspondence from
counsel
Telephone communication with
2.250
02/19/15 DCM N. Gregorson
2.250
450.00
450.00
1,012.50
1,012.50
1,012.50
-
Intraoffice communication with
H.B. Konkler-Goldsmith
Intraoffice communication with
D.C. McAndrews regarding Due
02/19/15 CEM Process Hearing
0.375
0.375
275.00
255.00
103.13
95.63
95.63
Rate reduced to Laffey
(14-15)
Review of correspondence from
N. Gregerson
Preparation of correspondence to
N. Gregerson
Review of correspondence from
L. Levisohn
Preparation of correspondence to
0.375
02/20/15 DCM L. Levisohn
0.375
450.00
450.00
168.75
168.75
168.75
-
Review of emails
N
ot
es
ar
d
A
w
A
dj
us
te
d
ed
Fe
eC
re
di
te
d
H
0.125
Civil Action No. 15‐851 (ESH)
Fe
eC
la
im
ed
H
ou
rs
C
re
di
te
d
R
at
eC
la
im
ed
R
at
eC
re
di
te
d
Pe
k
W
or
02/20/15 JH
Page 54 of 104
ou
rs
C
la
im
or
m
ed
rf
ls
In
iti
a
D
at
e
Attachment to Mem. Op. [ECF No. 30]
0.125
185.00
131.00
23.13
16.38
16.38
Rate reduced to 85%
USAO
Review of correspondence from
N. Gregorson regarding Due
Process Hearing
Review of correspondence from
A. McLaughlin regarding same
Intraoffice communication with
D.C. McAndrews and J. Hardy
regarding OSSE
02/20/15 CEM Review of DCPS report on IEE 0.875
Preparation for Due Process
02/21/15 DCM Hearing
0.375
0.875
275.00
255.00
240.63
223.13
223.13
Rate reduced to Laffey
(14-15)
0.375
450.00
450.00
168.75
168.75
168.75
-
Preparation for Due Process
Review of records
Preparation of Exhibits
Preparation of witness sheets
Preparation of correspondence to
02/22/15 DCM Experts
8.250
8.250
450.00
450.00
3,712.50
3,712.50
3,712.50
-
Intraoffice communication with
D.C. McAndrews regarding Due
0.625
02/22/15 CEM Process Hearing
0.625
275.00
255.00
171.88
159.38
159.38
Rate reduced to Laffey
(14-15)
Telephone communication with
Dr. L. Levisohn
02/23/15 DCM Preparation of witness sheets
1.375
450.00
450.00
618.75
618.75
618.75
-
1.375
Telephone communication with
L. Levisohn regarding Due
Process Hearing
Preparation of correspondence to
A. Sauer regarding Due Process
Hearing
Review of correspondence from
C. Sandoval regarding IEP
Intraoffice communication with
D.C. McAndrews regarding
1.125
02/23/15 CEM same
0.875
275.00
255.00
309.38
223.13
223.13
Hours reduced (IEP);
Rate reduced to Laffey
(14-15)
Five-Day Notice
Correspondence with D. Douglas
Correspondence with M.
Washington
Review of correspondence from
Dr. A. McLaughlin
Preparation of correspondence to
Dr. A. McLaughlin
Telephone communication with
Dr. N. Gregerson regarding
3.125
02/24/15 DCM possible testimony
3.125
450.00
450.00
1,406.25
1,406.25
1,406.25
-
Telephone communication with
client Hearing travel
arrangements
Research regarding same
N
ot
es
ar
d
A
w
A
dj
us
te
d
ed
Fe
eC
re
di
te
d
H
Civil Action No. 15‐851 (ESH)
Fe
eC
la
im
ed
H
ou
rs
C
re
di
te
d
R
at
eC
la
im
ed
R
at
eC
re
di
te
d
Page 55 of 104
ou
rs
C
la
im
or
m
ed
W
or
k
Pe
rf
ls
In
iti
a
D
at
e
Attachment to Mem. Op. [ECF No. 30]
1.125
1.125
155.00
116.00
174.38
130.50
130.50
Rate reduced to 75%
USAO
0.375
0.375
185.00
131.00
69.38
49.13
49.13
Rate reduced to 85%
USAO
0.125
0.125
275.00
255.00
34.38
31.88
31.88
Rate reduced to Laffey
(14-15)
Preparation of Due Process letter
Preparation of Exhibits
Preparation of experts
Telephone communication with
L. Levisohn
Telephone communications with
D. Douglas
Telephone communication with
3.875
02/25/15 DCM A. McLaughlin
3.875
450.00
450.00
1,743.75
1,743.75
1,743.75
-
02/24/15 AS
Intraoffice communication
regarding Due Process Exhibits
Telephone communication with
02/24/15 JH
client
Intraoffice communication with
D.C. McAndrews regarding
02/24/15 CEM Hearing
02/25/15 JH
Initial Preparation of Exhibits
Preparation of Exhibits
1.250
1.250
185.00
131.00
231.25
163.75
163.75
Rate reduced to 85%
USAO
02/26/15 AS
Telephone communication with
client regarding Hearing
0.125
0.125
155.00
116.00
19.38
14.50
14.50
Rate reduced to 75%
USAO
Intraoffice communication with
D.C. McAndrews regarding
transportation, Due Process
Hearing, compensatory
education and S/L
Review of correspondence from
counsel, M. Washington,
regarding transportation
Intraoffice communication with
A. Sauer regarding IEP and
residence
Review of correspondence from
N. Gregorson regarding Due
Process Hearing
Review of correspondence from
02/26/15 CEM A. McLaughlin regarding same 0.875
Review of School District
02/27/15 DCM Motion to Dismiss
0.125
0.500
275.00
255.00
240.63
127.50
127.50
Hours reduced (IEP);
Rate reduced to Laffey
(14-15)
0.125
450.00
450.00
56.25
56.25
56.25
-
Review of Five-Day Notice
Intraoffice communication with
D.C. McAndrews, K. Conaboy
and Evaluators regarding Due
02/27/15 CEM Process Hearing and Exhibits
0.500
275.00
255.00
137.50
127.50
127.50
Rate reduced to Laffey
(14-15)
0.500
Intraoffice communication with
D.C. McAndrews regarding
exhibits
Intraoffice communication with
A. Sauer and D.C. McAndrews
regarding residence and Due
Process Hearing
Intraoffice communication with
D.C. McAndrews regarding
03/01/15 CEM Motion
Preparation of Reply to Motion
03/02/15 DCM to Dismiss
Finalization of Due Process
03/02/15 JH
Exhibit Books
N
ot
es
ar
d
A
w
A
dj
us
te
d
ed
Fe
eC
re
di
te
d
H
Civil Action No. 15‐851 (ESH)
Fe
eC
la
im
ed
H
ou
rs
C
re
di
te
d
R
at
eC
la
im
ed
R
at
eC
re
di
te
d
Page 56 of 104
ou
rs
C
la
im
or
m
ed
W
or
k
Pe
rf
ls
In
iti
a
D
at
e
Attachment to Mem. Op. [ECF No. 30]
Rate reduced to Laffey
(14-15)
0.500
0.500
275.00
255.00
137.50
127.50
127.50
0.875
0.875
450.00
450.00
393.75
393.75
393.75
1.000
1.000
185.00
131.00
185.00
131.00
131.00
Rate reduced to 85%
USAO
Review of Motion to Dismiss
Intraoffice communication with
D.C. McAndrews regarding
same
Intraoffice communication with
A. Sauer regarding housing for
Due Process Hearing
Intraoffice communication with
D.C. McAndrews regarding Due
Process Hearing
Review of file materials
regarding exhibits
Intraoffice communication with
D.C. McAndrews, E. Gilmore
regarding Response to Motion to
1.250
03/02/15 CEM Dismiss
1.250
275.00
255.00
343.75
318.75
318.75
Rate reduced to Laffey
(14-15)
Review of correspondence from
03/03/15 DCM counsel, M. Washington
0.125
0.125
450.00
450.00
56.25
56.25
56.25
03/03/15 JH
0.125
0.125
185.00
131.00
23.13
16.38
16.38
Rate reduced to 85%
USAO
Intraoffice communication with
D.C. McAndrews regarding
Motion and Disclosures
Review of correspondence from
A. McLaughlin regarding Due
Process Hearing
Intraoffice communication with
A. Sauer regarding services and
transportation
Intraoffice communication with
D.C. McAndrews, E. Gilmore
and J. Hardy regarding
0.750
03/03/15 CEM Disclosures
0.750
275.00
255.00
206.25
191.25
191.25
Rate reduced to Laffey
(14-15)
Correspondence with counsel
N
ot
es
ar
d
A
w
A
dj
us
te
d
ed
Fe
eC
re
di
te
d
H
Review of file
materials/Intraoffice
communication regarding School
District records receipt
Telephone communication with
L. Levisohn
Research regarding Due Process
Review of correspondence from
A. McLaughlin
Preparation of correspondence to
A. McLaughlin
Preparation of correspondence to
Hearing Officer
Review of correspondence from
2.250
03/04/15 DCM Hearing Officer
Civil Action No. 15‐851 (ESH)
Fe
eC
la
im
ed
H
ou
rs
C
re
di
te
d
R
at
eC
la
im
ed
R
at
eC
re
di
te
d
Page 57 of 104
ou
rs
C
la
im
or
m
ed
W
or
k
Pe
rf
ls
In
iti
a
D
at
e
Attachment to Mem. Op. [ECF No. 30]
2.250
450.00
450.00
1,012.50
1,012.50
1,012.50
-
0.750
0.750
155.00
116.00
116.25
87.00
87.00
Rate reduced to 75%
USAO
Intraoffice communication with
D.C. McAndrews regarding
objections, Disclosures and Due
Process Hearing
Intraoffice communication with
A. Sauer regarding Disclosures,
telephone call with OSSE and
services
Intraoffice communication with
D.C. McAndrews, J. Hardy and
H.B. Konkler-Goldsmith
regarding same
Research regarding services
Review of correspondence from
Hearing Officer regarding
1.375
03/04/15 CEM Disclosures
1.375
275.00
255.00
378.13
350.63
350.63
Rate reduced to Laffey
(14-15)
1.375
450.00
450.00
618.75
618.75
618.75
-
0.250
155.00
116.00
38.75
29.00
29.00
Rate reduced to 75%
USAO
03/04/15 AS
Telephone communication with
OSSE Transportation regarding
location/address
Telephone communication with
client regarding housing,
attendance and transportation
Review of correspondences from
A. Washington
Preparation of correspondences
to A. Washington
Review of correspondence from
counsel, M. Washington
Preparation of correspondence to
counsel
Review of School District
records
1.375
03/05/15 DCM Preparation for Due Process
Telephone communication with
client regarding assistance and
Hearing
0.250
03/05/15 AS
N
ot
es
ar
d
ed
A
w
A
dj
us
te
d
H
Fe
eC
re
di
te
d
Pe
k
W
or
Civil Action No. 15‐851 (ESH)
Fe
eC
la
im
ed
H
ou
rs
C
re
di
te
d
R
at
eC
la
im
ed
R
at
eC
re
di
te
d
Page 58 of 104
ou
rs
C
la
im
or
m
ed
rf
ls
In
iti
a
D
at
e
Attachment to Mem. Op. [ECF No. 30]
Review of correspondence from
counsel, M. Washington and
D.C. McAndrews, regarding
Disclosures
Review of correspondence from
D.C. McAndrews and A.
McLaughlin regarding Due
Process Hearing
Intraoffice communication with
A. Sauer and D.C. McAndrews
regarding services
Intraoffice communication with
D.C. McAndrews regarding
0.750
03/05/15 CEM Exhibits
0.750
275.00
255.00
206.25
191.25
191.25
Telephone communication with
A. McLaughlin
Preparation of correspondence to
03/06/15 DCM Hearing Officer
1.500
1.500
450.00
450.00
675.00
675.00
675.00
03/06/15 JH
0.125
0.125
185.00
131.00
23.13
16.38
16.38
Rate reduced to 85%
USAO
0.125
0.125
275.00
255.00
34.38
31.88
31.88
Rate reduced to Laffey
(14-15)
Preparation for Due Process
Hearing
Communications with clients
Preparation of Opening
Preparation of witness sheets
Review of records
Preparation for crossexamination
Research legal issues underlying
8.500
03/08/15 DCM claims for relief
8.500
450.00
450.00
3,825.00
3,825.00
3,825.00
-
Review of file
materials/Intraoffice
communication regarding
Exhibits
Preparation of correspondence to
D. Douglas
0.375
0.375
185.00
131.00
69.38
49.13
49.13
Rate reduced to 85%
USAO
Telephone communications with
client regarding Due Process
Hearing and services
Intraoffice communication with
D.C. McAndrews regarding
same
Review of correspondence from
D.C. McAndrews, L. Levisohn
and D. Douglas regarding Due
1.000
03/08/15 CEM Process Hearing
1.000
275.00
255.00
275.00
255.00
255.00
Rate reduced to Laffey
(14-15)
Update case status
Intraoffice communication with
D.C. McAndrews regarding
03/06/15 CEM objections to disclosures
03/08/15 JH
Rate reduced to Laffey
(14-15)
Intraoffice communication with
D.C. McAndrews regarding
resolution and Due Process
03/09/15 CEM Complaint
Preparation for second day of
03/10/15 DCM hearing
Telephone communication with
03/10/15 JH
client
Telephone communication with
client regarding new housing and
03/11/15 AS
transportation
Review of correspondence from
M. Acosta regarding telephone
03/11/15 CEM call with client
N
ot
es
ar
d
A
w
A
dj
us
te
d
ed
Fe
eC
re
di
te
d
H
Civil Action No. 15‐851 (ESH)
Fe
eC
la
im
Pe
k
W
or
Preparation for, travel to and
attendance at Due Process
Hearing
Preparation for second day of
03/09/15 DCM Hearing
ed
H
ou
rs
C
re
di
te
d
R
at
eC
la
im
ed
R
at
eC
re
di
te
d
ou
rs
C
la
im
or
m
ed
Page 59 of 104
rf
ls
In
iti
a
D
at
e
Attachment to Mem. Op. [ECF No. 30]
9.500
9.500
450.00
450.00
4,275.00
4,275.00
4,275.00
-
0.500
0.500
275.00
255.00
137.50
127.50
127.50
Rate reduced to Laffey
(14-15)
0.750
0.750
450.00
450.00
337.50
337.50
337.50
0.125
0.125
185.00
131.00
23.13
16.38
16.38
Rate reduced to 85%
USAO
0.125
0.125
155.00
116.00
19.38
14.50
14.50
Rate reduced to 75%
USAO
0.125
0.125
275.00
255.00
34.38
31.88
31.88
Rate reduced to Laffey
(14-15)
13.125
450.00
450.00
5,906.25
5,906.25
5,906.25
-
0.375
230.00
230.00
86.25
86.25
86.25
-
2.250
450.00
450.00
1,012.50
1,012.50
1,012.50
0.125
185.00
131.00
23.13
16.38
16.38
Rate reduced to 85%
USAO
2.625
185.00
131.00
485.63
343.88
343.88
Rate reduced to 85%
USAO
0.125
275.00
255.00
34.38
31.88
31.88
Rate reduced to Laffey
(14-15)
Preparation for and attendance at
Due Process Hearing
03/12/15 DCM Post-hearing research
13.125
Research regarding Due Process
03/16/15 JCL issues
0.375
Research regarding Post-Hearing
submission
Preparation of same
Review of School District cases
03/16/15 DCM and statements regarding cases 2.250
Telephone communication with
03/16/15 JH
client
0.125
Preparation of materials for PostHearing submission
2.625
Intraoffice communication with
D.C. McAndrews regarding case
03/16/15 CEM law support
0.125
03/16/15 EG
Review of correspondence from
OSSE
Preparation of correspondence to
OSSE
Preparation of correspondence to
0.500
03/17/15 DCM counsel, M. Washington
Review of correspondence from
client regarding Hearing
03/17/15 AS
transcript
0.750
0.500
450.00
450.00
225.00
225.00
225.00
-
0.750
155.00
116.00
116.25
87.00
87.00
Rate reduced to 75%
USAO
Review of correspondence from
ODR
Preparation of correspondence to
ODR
Telephone communication with
client
0.375
0.375
185.00
131.00
69.38
49.13
49.13
Rate reduced to 85%
USAO
03/17/15 JH
N
ot
es
ar
d
A
w
A
dj
us
te
d
ed
Fe
eC
re
di
te
d
H
Civil Action No. 15‐851 (ESH)
Fe
eC
la
im
ed
H
ou
rs
C
re
di
te
d
R
at
eC
la
im
ed
R
at
eC
re
di
te
d
Page 60 of 104
ou
rs
C
la
im
or
m
ed
W
or
k
Pe
rf
ls
In
iti
a
D
at
e
Attachment to Mem. Op. [ECF No. 30]
Intraoffice communication with
A. Sauer regarding transcript
Intraoffice communication with
D.C. McAndrews regarding
03/17/15 CEM same and transportation
Preparation of Hearing
03/18/15 AS
Transcript Request
0.375
0.375
275.00
255.00
103.13
95.63
95.63
0.500
0.500
155.00
116.00
77.50
58.00
58.00
Rate reduced to Laffey
(14-15)
Rate reduced to 75%
USAO
Intraoffice communication with
A. Sauer regarding transcript
Intraoffice communication with
D.C. McAndrews regarding
03/18/15 CEM transcript
0.375
0.375
275.00
255.00
103.13
95.63
95.63
Rate reduced to Laffey
(14-15)
Review of correspondence from
client
Preparation of correspondence to
03/22/15 DCM client
0.250
Intraoffice communication with
03/24/15 CEM D.C. McAndrews
0.125
0.250
450.00
450.00
112.50
112.50
112.50
0.125
275.00
255.00
34.38
31.88
31.88
Rate reduced to Laffey
(14-15)
Intraoffice communication with
03/25/15 CEM A. Sauer regarding transcript
0.125
0.125
275.00
255.00
34.38
31.88
31.88
Rate reduced to Laffey
(14-15)
Review of correspondence from
ODR regarding Hearing Officer
Decision
Intraoffice communication with
D.C. McAndrews regarding
03/28/15 CEM same
0.250
0.250
275.00
255.00
68.75
63.75
63.75
Rate reduced to Laffey
(14-15)
Review of file
materials/Intraoffice
communication regarding
Hearing Officer Decision
Preparation of appeal
03/30/15 DCM Preparation of fee materials
1.750
1.750
450.00
450.00
787.50
787.50
787.50
-
Review of file materials
regarding Due Process transcript 0.125
0.125
185.00
131.00
23.13
16.38
16.38
Rate reduced to 85%
USAO
Review of Hearing Officer
Decision
Intraoffice communication with
D.C. McAndrews regarding
same
Review of correspondences from
S. Cogdell regarding transcript
and Hearing Officer Decision
Preparation of correspondences
1.625
03/30/15 CEM to S. Cogdell regarding same
1.625
275.00
255.00
446.88
414.38
414.38
Rate reduced to Laffey
(14-15)
Review of file materials
regarding IEP Amendment Form 0.125
0.125
185.00
131.00
23.13
16.38
16.38
Rate reduced to 85%
USAO
0.250
430.00
430.00
107.50
107.50
107.50
-
03/30/15 JH
03/31/15 JH
04/01/15 HBK Review Due Process decision
0.250
N
ot
es
ar
d
A
w
A
dj
us
te
d
ed
Fe
eC
re
di
te
d
H
Civil Action No. 15‐851 (ESH)
Fe
eC
la
im
ed
H
ou
rs
C
re
di
te
d
R
at
eC
la
im
ed
R
at
eC
re
di
te
d
Page 61 of 104
ou
rs
C
la
im
or
m
ed
W
or
k
Pe
rf
ls
In
iti
a
D
at
e
Attachment to Mem. Op. [ECF No. 30]
Telephone communication with
client
Preparation of correspondence to
client
04/01/15 DCM Preparation of Appeal materials 0.625
0.625
450.00
450.00
281.25
281.25
281.25
-
Intraoffice communication with
D.C. McAndrews regarding
Decision
Review of same
Intraoffice communication with
J. Hardy regarding conference
04/02/15 MEG call
0.375
430.00
430.00
161.25
161.25
161.25
-
Hours reduced (IEP);
Rate reduced to Laffey
(14-15)
Intraoffice communication with
D.C. McAndrews regarding
Hearing Officer Decision
Intraoffice communication with
J. Hardy regarding intraoffice
meeting
Intraoffice communication with
A. Sauer regarding IEP
04/02/15 CEM Amendment
04/03/15 DCM
04/03/15 CEM
04/06/15 DCM
Review IEP/ESY request
Review of file
materials/Intraoffice
communication regarding
response
Intraoffice communication with
D.C. McAndrews regarding
Amendment
Telephone communication with
client
Intraoffice communication with
D.C. McAndrews regarding IEP
Amendment
0.375
0.375
0.250
275.00
255.00
103.13
63.75
63.75
0.250
0.000
450.00
450.00
112.50
0.00
0.00
0.250
0.000
275.00
255.00
68.75
0.00
0.00
0.250
0.250
450.00
450.00
112.50
112.50
112.50
Hours reduced (IEP)
Hours reduced (IEP);
Rate reduced to Laffey
(14-15)
0.125
0.000
275.00
255.00
34.38
0.00
0.00
Hours reduced (IEP);
Rate reduced to Laffey
(14-15)
Review of file
materials/Intraoffice
communication regarding Due
04/07/15 HBK Process Decision
0.250
0.250
430.00
430.00
107.50
107.50
107.50
-
Review of Decision
Intraoffice communication with
D.C. McAndrews and H.B.
Konkler-Goldsmith regarding
04/07/15 MEG same
0.750
0.750
430.00
430.00
322.50
322.50
322.50
-
0.625
0.625
450.00
450.00
281.25
281.25
281.25
04/06/15 CEM
04/07/15 DCM Preparation of appeal materials
Review of file materials
04/07/15 JH
regarding Complaint
0.125
0.125
185.00
131.00
23.13
16.38
16.38
Rate reduced to 85%
USAO
Intraoffice communication with
D.C. McAndrews, H.B. KonklerGoldsmith and M. Gehring
04/07/15 CEM regarding appeal
0.375
0.375
275.00
255.00
103.13
95.63
95.63
Rate reduced to Laffey
(14-15)
Review of correspondence from
S. Cogdell regarding
compensatory education
Preparation of correspondence to
04/13/15 CEM S. Cogdell regarding same
0.125
0.125
275.00
255.00
34.38
31.88
31.88
Rate reduced to Laffey
(14-15)
N
ot
es
ar
d
A
w
A
dj
us
te
d
ed
Fe
eC
re
di
te
d
H
Civil Action No. 15‐851 (ESH)
Fe
eC
la
im
ed
H
ou
rs
C
re
di
te
d
R
at
eC
la
im
ed
R
at
eC
re
di
te
d
Page 62 of 104
ou
rs
C
la
im
or
m
ed
W
or
k
Pe
rf
ls
In
iti
a
D
at
e
Attachment to Mem. Op. [ECF No. 30]
Review of file regarding
transcript
0.250
Intraoffice communication with
D.C. McAndrews regarding case
04/22/15 CEM law
0.125
0.250
155.00
116.00
38.75
29.00
29.00
Rate reduced to 75%
USAO
0.125
275.00
255.00
34.38
31.88
31.88
Rate reduced to Laffey
(14-15)
Research regarding recent cases
04/22/15 DCM regarding specificity in IEP
0.125
0.000
450.00
450.00
56.25
0.00
0.00
04/25/15 JH
0.125
185.00
131.00
23.13
16.38
16.38
Hours reduced (IEP)
Rate reduced to 85%
USAO
04/21/15 AS
Deadlines
0.125
Review of correspondence from
S. Cogdell, K. Conaboy and D.C.
McAndrews
Intraoffice communication with
D.C. McAndrews regarding
Hearing Officer Decision
04/28/15 CEM implementation
0.375
Review of file, Note
05/04/15 MEG Review of documents
0.500
0.375
275.00
255.00
103.13
95.63
95.63
Rate reduced to Laffey
(14-15)
0.500
430.00
430.00
215.00
215.00
215.00
-
05/05/15 DCM Preparation of appeal papers
0.250
0.250
450.00
450.00
112.50
112.50
112.50
-
0.125
0.125
155.00
116.00
19.38
14.50
14.50
0.125
0.125
185.00
131.00
23.13
16.38
16.38
Rate reduced to 75%
USAO
Rate reduced to 85%
USAO
Intraoffice communication with
D.C. McAndrews and J. Hardy
regarding negotiations,
compensatory education and fees
Intraoffice communication with
A. Sauer regarding
communication with client and
1.000
05/05/15 CEM compensatory education
1.000
275.00
255.00
275.00
255.00
255.00
Rate reduced to Laffey
(14-15)
Review of file
materials/Intraoffice
communication regarding
compensatory education
05/06/15 DCM programs
0.250
0.250
450.00
450.00
112.50
112.50
112.50
-
Intraoffice communication with
C. McAndrews, J. Hardy, and
D.C. McAndrews regarding
billing
0.250
0.250
155.00
116.00
38.75
29.00
29.00
Rate reduced to 75%
USAO
Intraoffice communication with
D.C. McAndrews regarding
compensatory education and
costs
Intraoffice communication with
A. Sauer, E. Gilmore and D.C.
McAndrews regarding
compensatory education and
05/06/15 CEM reimbursement
0.375
0.375
275.00
255.00
103.13
95.63
95.63
Rate reduced to Laffey
(14-15)
05/05/15 AS
05/05/15 JH
05/06/15 AS
Telephone communication with
client regarding services
Review of file materials
regarding emails
N
ot
es
ar
d
A
w
A
dj
us
te
d
ed
Fe
eC
re
di
te
d
H
Civil Action No. 15‐851 (ESH)
Fe
eC
la
im
Pe
k
W
or
Intraoffice communication with
C. McAndrews regarding
05/07/15 AS
services
Intraoffice communication with
A. Sauer regarding
05/07/15 CEM compensatory education
Intraoffice communication with
C. McAndrews and H.B.
05/08/15 AS
Konkler-Goldsmith
ed
H
ou
rs
C
re
di
te
d
R
at
eC
la
im
ed
R
at
eC
re
di
te
d
ou
rs
C
la
im
or
m
ed
Page 63 of 104
rf
ls
In
iti
a
D
at
e
Attachment to Mem. Op. [ECF No. 30]
0.250
0.250
155.00
116.00
38.75
29.00
29.00
Rate reduced to 75%
USAO
0.125
0.125
275.00
255.00
34.38
31.88
31.88
Rate reduced to Laffey
(14-15)
0.125
0.125
155.00
116.00
19.38
14.50
14.50
Rate reduced to 75%
USAO
Intraoffice communication with
A. Sauer regarding
compensatory education
Intraoffice communication with
H.B. Konkler-Goldsmith and A.
Sauer regarding Due Process
05/08/15 CEM Hearing
0.250
0.250
275.00
255.00
68.75
63.75
63.75
Rate reduced to Laffey
(14-15)
10.250
430.00
430.00
4,407.50
4,407.50
4,407.50
0.125
155.00
116.00
19.38
14.50
14.50
Rate reduced to 75%
USAO
0.500
155.00
116.00
77.50
58.00
58.00
Rate reduced to 75%
USAO
0.250
275.00
255.00
68.75
63.75
63.75
Rate reduced to Laffey
(14-15)
0.125
275.00
255.00
34.38
31.88
31.88
Rate reduced to Laffey
(14-15)
0.125
275.00
255.00
34.38
31.88
31.88
Rate reduced to Laffey
(14-15)
0.375
0.375
275.00
255.00
103.13
95.63
95.63
0.250
0.250
155.00
116.00
38.75
29.00
29.00
Rate reduced to Laffey
(14-15)
Rate reduced to 75%
USAO
Intraoffice communication with
A.Sauer regarding compensatory
05/19/15 CEM education and programming
0.125
0.125
275.00
255.00
34.38
31.88
31.88
Rate reduced to Laffey
(14-15)
Intraoffice communication with
C. McAndrews regarding
Complaint
05/20/15 MEG Update case status
0.250
430.00
430.00
107.50
107.50
107.50
-
Preparation of Complaint
Intraoffice communication with
D.C. McAndrews regarding
05/11/15 MEG same
10.250
Telephone communication with
05/11/15 AS
client
0.125
Preparation of N.T. binders
Review of correspondence from
05/11/15 EB
counsel
0.500
Intraoffice communication with
A. Sauer regarding program and
compensatory education
Intraoffice communication with
05/11/15 CEM M. Gehring regarding Complaint 0.250
Review of correspondence from
S. Cogdell regarding
0.125
05/14/15 CEM implementation
Telephone communication with
client regarding compensatory
0.125
05/17/15 CEM education
Intraoffice communication with
D.C. McAndrews regarding
contact with client
Intraoffice communication with
A. Sauer regarding same
Telephone communication with
client regarding compensatory
05/18/15 CEM education
Intraoffice communication with
05/19/15 AS
C. McAndrews
0.250
N
ot
es
ar
d
A
w
A
dj
us
te
d
ed
Fe
eC
re
di
te
d
H
Civil Action No. 15‐851 (ESH)
Fe
eC
la
im
ed
H
ou
rs
C
re
di
te
d
R
at
eC
la
im
ed
R
at
eC
re
di
te
d
Page 64 of 104
ou
rs
C
la
im
or
m
ed
W
or
k
Pe
rf
ls
In
iti
a
D
at
e
Attachment to Mem. Op. [ECF No. 30]
Preparation of Federal Court
05/20/15 DCM Complaint
0.500
0.500
450.00
450.00
225.00
225.00
225.00
-
Intraoffice communication with
E. Bissell regarding Complaint
Intraoffice communication with
C. McAndrews and D.C.
05/21/15 MEG McAndrews regarding status
0.375
0.375
430.00
430.00
161.25
161.25
161.25
-
Review of file
materials/Intraoffice
communication regarding
contacts for School District
implementation
Preparation of Federal Court
05/21/15 DCM Complaint
1.000
1.000
450.00
450.00
450.00
450.00
450.00
-
05/21/15 AS
Intraoffice communication with
C. McAndrews
Preparation of correspondence to
client
0.500
0.500
155.00
116.00
77.50
58.00
58.00
05/21/15 EB
Review and revise Complaint
0.750
0.750
155.00
116.00
116.25
87.00
87.00
05/21/15 JH
Review of email
0.125
0.125
185.00
131.00
23.13
16.38
16.38
Rate reduced to 75%
USAO
Rate reduced to 75%
USAO
Rate reduced to 85%
USAO
0.625
275.00
255.00
171.88
159.38
159.38
Rate reduced to Laffey
(14-15)
0.250
155.00
116.00
38.75
29.00
29.00
0.125
185.00
131.00
23.13
16.38
16.38
Rate reduced to 75%
USAO
Rate reduced to 85%
USAO
0.250
0.250
430.00
430.00
107.50
107.50
107.50
-
Intraoffice communication with
05/27/15 CEM M. Gehring regarding Complaint 0.125
0.125
275.00
255.00
34.38
31.88
31.88
Rate reduced to Laffey
(14-15)
Intraoffice communication with
J. Hardy and C. McAndrews
regarding status
05/28/15 MEG Update case status
0.250
0.250
430.00
430.00
107.50
107.50
107.50
-
05/28/15 DCM Preparation of Complaint
0.125
0.125
450.00
450.00
56.25
56.25
56.25
-
Intraoffice communication with
05/28/15 CEM J. Hardy regarding appeal
0.250
0.250
275.00
255.00
68.75
63.75
63.75
Rate reduced to Laffey
(14-15)
05/29/15 MEG Review and revise Complaint
0.625
0.625
430.00
430.00
268.75
268.75
268.75
-
Preparation of correspondences
to S. Cogdell regarding
compensatory education
Preparation of correspondence to
client regarding contact
Intraoffice communication with
D.C. McAndrews regarding
Complaint, Hearing Officer
Decision implementation and
0.625
05/21/15 CEM appeal
Intraoffice communication with
C. McAndrews, D.C.
05/22/15 AS
McAndrews and J. Hardy
0.250
Review of file materials
05/23/15 JH
regarding deadlines
0.125
Update case status
Intraoffice communication with
05/27/15 MEG C. McAndrews regarding status
N
ot
es
ar
d
A
w
A
dj
us
te
d
ed
Fe
eC
re
di
te
d
H
Civil Action No. 15‐851 (ESH)
Fe
eC
la
im
ed
H
ou
rs
C
re
di
te
d
R
at
eC
la
im
ed
R
at
eC
re
di
te
d
Page 65 of 104
ou
rs
C
la
im
or
m
ed
W
or
k
Pe
rf
ls
In
iti
a
D
at
e
Attachment to Mem. Op. [ECF No. 30]
06/01/15 DCM Preparation of Complaint
Preparation of CV for D.C.
06/02/15 EB
McAndrews
0.500
0.500
450.00
450.00
225.00
225.00
225.00
0.125
0.125
155.00
116.00
19.38
14.50
14.50
Rate reduced to 75%
USAO
Preparation of fee materials
Intraoffice communication with
A. Sauer regarding
06/03/15 CEM communication with client
0.500
0.500
275.00
275.00
137.50
137.50
137.50
-
Intraoffice communication with
C. McAndrews and D.C.
06/03/15 MEG McAndrews regarding status
0.375
0.375
430.00
430.00
161.25
161.25
161.25
-
Review of correspondence from
S. Cogdell regarding
compensatory education
Review of file materials
regarding same
Intraoffice communication with
D.C. McAndrews regarding
0.375
06/05/15 CEM expert
Telephone communication with
06/05/15 DCM counsel, V. Porter
0.250
0.375
275.00
275.00
103.13
103.13
103.13
-
0.250
450.00
450.00
112.50
112.50
112.50
-
Intraoffice communication with
D.C. McAndrews and A. Sauer
regarding Hearing Officer
Decision implementation
Intraoffice communication with
D.C. McAndrews regarding
06/08/15 CEM communication with client
0.250
0.250
275.00
275.00
68.75
68.75
68.75
-
Intraoffice communication with
06/09/15 MEG J. Hardy regarding filing
0.125
0.125
430.00
430.00
53.75
53.75
53.75
-
Preparation of Complaint
Review of file
materials/Intraoffice
06/09/15 DCM communication regarding same
0.250
0.250
450.00
450.00
112.50
112.50
112.50
-
0.125
0.125
155.00
116.00
19.38
14.50
14.50
Rate reduced to 75%
USAO
1.000
1.000
185.00
131.00
185.00
131.00
131.00
Rate reduced to 85%
USAO
0.625
0.625
275.00
275.00
171.88
171.88
171.88
-
06/09/15 AS
06/09/15 JH
Telephone communication with
client
Intraoffice communication with
C. McAndrews, D.C.
McAndrews and J. Hardy
Preparation of Complaint
documents
Finalize Complaint
Intraoffice communication
regarding Federal Complaint
Intraoffice communication with
J. Hardy regarding Summons
and Judge
Intraoffice communication with
D.C. McAndrews and J. Hardy
06/10/15 CEM regarding Complaint
Intraoffice communication with
06/10/15 MEG J. Hardy regarding status
Preparation of materials to
06/10/15 DCM accompany Complaint
Intraoffice communication with
C. McAndrews, D.C.
06/10/15 AS
McAndrews and J. Hardy
N
ot
es
ar
d
A
w
A
dj
us
te
d
ed
Fe
eC
re
di
te
d
H
Civil Action No. 15‐851 (ESH)
Fe
eC
la
im
ed
H
ou
rs
C
re
di
te
d
R
at
eC
la
im
ed
R
at
eC
re
di
te
d
Page 66 of 104
ou
rs
C
la
im
or
m
ed
W
or
k
Pe
rf
ls
In
iti
a
D
at
e
Attachment to Mem. Op. [ECF No. 30]
0.250
0.250
430.00
430.00
107.50
107.50
107.50
-
0.250
0.250
450.00
450.00
112.50
112.50
112.50
-
0.125
0.125
155.00
116.00
19.38
14.50
14.50
Rate reduced to 75%
USAO
Telephone communication with
R. Dawson, District Court
Federal District Court
Finalize Notice
Preparation of Certificate of
Service
06/10/15 JH
Intraoffice communication
0.500
Review of correspondence from
J. Michney regarding
06/12/15 CEM compensatory education
0.125
0.500
185.00
131.00
92.50
65.50
65.50
Rate reduced to 85%
USAO
0.125
275.00
275.00
34.38
34.38
34.38
-
Intraoffice communication with
D.C. McAndrews regarding
compensatory education
Intraoffice communication with
D.C. McAndrews and J. Hardy
regarding negotiations and
06/14/15 CEM Complaint
0.375
0.375
275.00
275.00
103.13
103.13
103.13
-
Intraoffice communication with
06/15/15 CEM J. Hardy regarding Complaint
0.125
0.125
275.00
275.00
34.38
34.38
34.38
-
Intraoffice communication with
06/15/15 MEG J. Hardy regarding service
0.125
0.125
430.00
430.00
53.75
53.75
53.75
-
Review of file materials
regarding Complaint
Preparation of correspondence to
counsel, L. George
0.375
0.375
185.00
131.00
69.38
49.13
49.13
Rate reduced to 85%
USAO
0.500
275.00
275.00
137.50
137.50
137.50
-
0.125
275.00
275.00
34.38
34.38
34.38
-
0.625
0.625
450.00
450.00
281.25
281.25
281.25
0.125
0.125
155.00
116.00
19.38
14.50
14.50
Rate reduced to 75%
USAO
0.250
0.250
450.00
450.00
112.50
112.50
112.50
-
0.250
0.000
275.00
275.00
68.75
0.00
0.00
Hours reduced (RSM)
06/15/15 JH
Review of Complaint
Preparation of correspondence to
J. Michney regarding
06/16/15 CEM compensatory education
0.500
Intraoffice communication with
D.C. McAndrews regarding
0.125
06/18/15 CEM resolution
Telephone communications with
counsel, L. George
Preparation of correspondence to
06/18/15 DCM counsel, A. Crawford
Intraoffice communication with
06/18/15 AS
C. McAndrews
Research regarding
06/19/15 DCM compensatory education
Intraoffice communication with
D.C. McAndrews regarding
06/20/15 CEM resolution
Intraoffice communication with
A. Sauer regarding
06/30/15 CEM compensatory education
N
ot
es
ar
d
A
w
A
dj
us
te
d
ed
Fe
eC
re
di
te
d
H
Civil Action No. 15‐851 (ESH)
Fe
eC
la
im
ed
H
ou
rs
C
re
di
te
d
R
at
eC
la
im
ed
R
at
eC
re
di
te
d
Page 67 of 104
ou
rs
C
la
im
or
m
ed
W
or
k
Pe
rf
ls
In
iti
a
D
at
e
Attachment to Mem. Op. [ECF No. 30]
0.125
0.125
275.00
275.00
34.38
34.38
34.38
0.125
0.125
155.00
116.00
19.38
14.50
14.50
0.125
0.125
155.00
116.00
19.38
14.50
14.50
Rate reduced to 75%
USAO
Rate reduced to 75%
USAO
0.125
0.125
0.125
0.125
275.00
430.00
275.00
430.00
34.38
53.75
34.38
53.75
34.38
53.75
-
Review of correspondence from
A. Crawford regarding
reimbursement
Intraoffice communication with
07/06/15 CEM E. Gilmore regarding same
0.250
0.250
275.00
275.00
68.75
68.75
68.75
-
Review of file
materials/Intraoffice
communication regarding
07/06/15 DCM implementation issues
0.250
0.250
450.00
450.00
112.50
112.50
112.50
-
Preparation of correspondence to
A. Crawford regarding
reimbursement
Intraoffice communication with
D.C. McAndrews regarding
0.250
07/07/15 CEM same
0.250
275.00
275.00
68.75
68.75
68.75
-
0.125
0.125
155.00
116.00
19.38
14.50
14.50
Rate reduced to 75%
USAO
Preparation of correspondence to
counsel, A. Crawford, regarding
IEE reimbursement and global
0.375
07/15/15 DCM settlement
0.375
450.00
450.00
168.75
168.75
168.75
-
06/30/15 AS
07/01/15 AS
Telephone communication with
client
Intraoffice communication with
C. McAndrews
Telephone communication with
client
Intraoffice communication with
07/02/15 CEM J. Hardy regarding transcript
07/02/15 MEG Update case status
07/08/15 AS
Telephone communication with
client
Intraoffice communication with
C. McAndrews
-
N
ot
es
ar
d
A
w
A
dj
us
te
d
ed
Fe
eC
re
di
te
d
H
Civil Action No. 15‐851 (ESH)
Fe
eC
la
im
ed
H
ou
rs
C
re
di
te
d
R
at
eC
la
im
ed
R
at
eC
re
di
te
d
Page 68 of 104
ou
rs
C
la
im
or
m
ed
W
or
k
Pe
rf
ls
In
iti
a
D
at
e
Attachment to Mem. Op. [ECF No. 30]
Review of correspondence from
A. Crawford regarding
reimbursement
Review of correspondence from
L. Levisohn regarding invoice
Intraoffice communication with
D.C. McAndrews regarding
same
Intraoffice communication with
J. Hardy regarding service
Review of correspondence from
A. Crawford, D.C. McAndrews,
and E. Gilmore regarding
reimbursement
Review of correspondence from
D.C. McAndrews and A.
Crawford regarding
reimbursesment
Review of correspondence from
counsel, M. Washington
regarding settlement
Review of correspondence from
D.C. McAndrews regarding
0.750
07/16/15 CEM invoice
0.750
275.00
275.00
206.25
206.25
206.25
-
Review of correspondence from
counsel, A. Crawford
Preparation of correspondence to
07/16/15 DCM counsel
0.375
0.375
450.00
450.00
168.75
168.75
168.75
-
Review of file
materials/Intraoffice
communication regarding
service
Preparation of correspondence to
counsel
Preparation of services
documents
1.375
1.375
185.00
131.00
254.38
180.13
180.13
Rate reduced to 85%
USAO
Review of correspondence from
counsel, L. George, regarding
service
Intraoffice communication with
D.C. McAndrews regarding
07/27/15 CEM same
0.125
0.125
275.00
275.00
34.38
34.38
34.38
-
0.250
0.250
430.00
430.00
107.50
107.50
107.50
-
0.125
0.125
450.00
450.00
56.25
56.25
56.25
-
0.125
0.125
275.00
275.00
34.38
34.38
34.38
-
0.125
0.125
275.00
275.00
34.38
34.38
34.38
-
07/16/15 JH
07/27/15 MEG
07/29/15 DCM
07/30/15 CEM
08/03/15 CEM
Review of correspondence from
counsel
Review of email regarding
service
Review of correspondence from
counsel, L. George regarding
service
Intraoffice communication with
D.C. McAndrews regarding
service
Review of memorandum
regarding service of process
Intraoffice communication with
D.C. McAndrews regarding
service of process
Intraoffice communication with
A. Sauer regarding call with
08/05/15 CEM client
N
ot
es
ar
d
A
w
A
dj
us
te
d
ed
Fe
eC
re
di
te
d
H
Civil Action No. 15‐851 (ESH)
Fe
eC
la
im
ed
H
ou
rs
C
re
di
te
d
R
at
eC
la
im
ed
R
at
eC
re
di
te
d
Page 69 of 104
ou
rs
C
la
im
or
m
ed
W
or
k
Pe
rf
ls
In
iti
a
D
at
e
Attachment to Mem. Op. [ECF No. 30]
0.375
0.375
275.00
275.00
103.13
103.13
103.13
-
Review of correspondence from
counsel, L. Gease
Research regarding service of
08/05/15 DCM process
0.500
0.500
450.00
450.00
225.00
225.00
225.00
-
0.125
0.125
155.00
116.00
19.38
14.50
14.50
Rate reduced to 75%
USAO
0.125
0.125
155.00
116.00
19.38
14.50
14.50
Rate reduced to 75%
USAO
0.125
0.125
275.00
275.00
34.38
34.38
34.38
-
0.250
0.250
450.00
450.00
112.50
112.50
112.50
-
Intraoffice communication with
H.B. Konkler-Goldsmith
regarding Hearing Officer
Decision
Intraoffice communication with
A. Sauer regarding same
Intraoffice communication with
J. Hardy, D.C. McAndrews and
M. Gehring regarding service of
0.500
08/10/15 CEM process
0.500
275.00
275.00
137.50
137.50
137.50
-
Intraoffice communication with
C. McAndrews regarding
08/10/15 HBK Hearing Officer Decision
0.125
430.00
430.00
53.75
53.75
53.75
-
0.375
430.00
430.00
161.25
161.25
161.25
-
08/05/15 AS
Intraoffice communication with
C. McAndrews
Telephone communication with
client
Telephone communication with
client
Intraoffice communication with
08/06/15 AS
C. McAndrews
Intraoffice communication with
A. Sauer regarding
08/07/15 CEM communication with client
Review of file
materials/Intraoffice
communication regarding
08/07/15 DCM service and settlement
0.125
Intraoffice communication with
D.C. McAndrews and J. Hardy
regarding service
0.375
08/10/15 MEG Research regarding same
Research
Preparation of documents for
0.250
08/10/15 DCM personal services
Intraoffice communication with
C. McAndrews, J. Hardy and M.
Gehring
0.125
08/10/15 AS
0.250
450.00
450.00
112.50
112.50
112.50
-
0.125
155.00
116.00
19.38
14.50
14.50
Rate reduced to 75%
USAO
Review of file
materials/Intraoffice
communication regarding
service
Preparation of correspondence to
client
0.375
0.375
185.00
131.00
69.38
49.13
49.13
Rate reduced to 85%
USAO
08/10/15 JH
N
ot
es
ar
d
A
w
A
dj
us
te
d
ed
Fe
eC
re
di
te
d
H
Civil Action No. 15‐851 (ESH)
Fe
eC
la
im
ed
H
ou
rs
C
re
di
te
d
R
at
eC
la
im
ed
R
at
eC
re
di
te
d
Page 70 of 104
ou
rs
C
la
im
or
m
ed
W
or
k
Pe
rf
ls
In
iti
a
D
at
e
Attachment to Mem. Op. [ECF No. 30]
Intraoffice communication with
D.C. McAndrews and J. Hardy
regarding service of process
Intraoffice communication with
A. Sauer regarding same
Review of correspondence to
08/11/15 CEM process server
0.500
0.500
275.00
275.00
137.50
137.50
137.50
-
Intraoffice communication with
J. Hardy and D.C. McAndrews
08/11/15 MEG regarding service
0.250
0.250
430.00
430.00
107.50
107.50
107.50
-
0.125
0.125
155.00
116.00
19.38
14.50
14.50
Rate reduced to 75%
USAO
0.250
0.250
185.00
131.00
46.25
32.75
32.75
Rate reduced to 85%
USAO
0.125
0.125
275.00
275.00
34.38
34.38
34.38
-
Intraoffice communication with
08/20/15 CEM J. Hardy regarding service
0.250
0.250
275.00
275.00
68.75
68.75
68.75
-
Intraoffice communication with
J. Hardy regarding status
08/20/15 MEG Research
0.375
0.375
430.00
430.00
161.25
161.25
161.25
-
0.250
0.250
450.00
450.00
112.50
112.50
112.50
Telephone communication with
client
Intraoffice communication with
08/11/15 AS
C. McAndrews
Review of file materials
regarding service
08/11/15 JH
Preparation of email
Intraoffice communication with
J. Hardy regarding
08/18/15 CEM reimbursement
Review of file
materials/Intraoffice
communication regarding
08/20/15 DCM service of process
Review of file materials
08/23/15 JH
regarding deadlines
Intraoffice communication with
08/24/15 AS
C. McAndrews
0.125
0.125
185.00
131.00
23.13
16.38
16.38
0.125
0.125
155.00
116.00
19.38
14.50
14.50
Rate reduced to 85%
USAO
Rate reduced to 75%
USAO
Review of file materials
regarding service of process
Intraoffice communication with
08/25/15 CEM A. Sauer regarding service
0.375
0.375
275.00
275.00
103.13
103.13
103.13
-
Preparation of correspondence to
Office of Attorney General
Intraoffice communication with
C. McAndrews
0.500
0.500
155.00
116.00
77.50
58.00
58.00
Rate reduced to 75%
USAO
0.250
0.250
275.00
275.00
68.75
68.75
68.75
-
Review of file
materials/Intraoffice
communication regarding
settlement, service of Complaint
08/28/15 DCM and implementation
0.250
0.250
450.00
450.00
112.50
112.50
112.50
-
08/25/15 AS
Intraoffice communication with
D.C. McAndrews regarding
negotiation
Intraoffice communication with
08/28/15 CEM J. Hardy regarding service
08/28/15 JH
Review of file materials
regarding emails and
Notification of Service
N
ot
es
ar
d
A
w
A
dj
us
te
d
ed
Fe
eC
re
di
te
d
H
Civil Action No. 15‐851 (ESH)
Fe
eC
la
im
ed
H
ou
rs
C
re
di
te
d
R
at
eC
la
im
ed
R
at
eC
re
di
te
d
Page 71 of 104
ou
rs
C
la
im
or
m
ed
W
or
k
Pe
rf
ls
In
iti
a
D
at
e
Attachment to Mem. Op. [ECF No. 30]
Rate reduced to 85%
USAO
0.250
0.250
185.00
131.00
46.25
32.75
32.75
Review of correspondences from
J. Michney regarding
compensatory education
Preparation of correspondence to
08/31/15 CEM J. Michney regarding same
0.250
0.250
275.00
275.00
68.75
68.75
68.75
08/31/15 JH
0.125
0.125
185.00
131.00
23.13
16.38
16.38
Rate reduced to 85%
USAO
0.125
0.125
155.00
116.00
19.38
14.50
14.50
Rate reduced to 75%
USAO
0.125
0.125
275.00
275.00
34.38
34.38
34.38
-
0.250
0.250
275.00
275.00
68.75
68.75
68.75
-
0.250
0.250
185.00
131.00
46.25
32.75
32.75
Rate reduced to 85%
USAO
Review of correspondence from
09/04/15 CEM Court regarding Answer
0.125
0.125
275.00
275.00
34.38
34.38
34.38
-
0.125
430.00
430.00
53.75
53.75
53.75
-
0.125
450.00
450.00
56.25
56.25
56.25
Review of file materials
Intraoffice communication with
C. McAndrews, J. Hardy
Intraoffice communication with
J. Hardy regarding proof of
09/02/15 CEM service
Telephone communication with
09/03/15 CEM counsel
Review of file materials
regarding Affidavits
09/03/15 JH
Finalize same
08/31/15 AS
Intraoffice communication with
D.C. McAndrews and C.
0.125
09/04/15 MEG McAndrews regarding status
Review of correspondence from
09/04/15 DCM Clerk's Office
0.125
Review of file materials
09/04/15 JH
regarding service
0.125
0.125
185.00
131.00
23.13
16.38
16.38
Rate reduced to 85%
USAO
Preparation of correspondences
to counsel
Review of correspondences from
counsel
0.500
09/11/15 MEG Review of Complaint
0.500
430.00
430.00
215.00
215.00
215.00
-
Intraoffice communication with
09/14/15 CEM J. Hardy regarding counsel
0.125
0.125
275.00
275.00
34.38
34.38
34.38
-
Intraoffice communication with
A. Sauer regarding counseling
Intraoffice communication with
M. Gehring regarding Complaint
and communication with School
District
Intraoffice communication with
0.625
09/15/15 CEM J. Hardy regarding counsel
0.625
275.00
275.00
171.88
171.88
171.88
-
Intraoffice communication with
C. McAndrews regarding status
Preparation of correspondence to
counsel
Amended Complaint
Telephone communication with
09/15/15 MEG counsel
0.750
0.750
430.00
430.00
322.50
322.50
322.50
-
N
ot
es
ar
d
A
w
A
dj
us
te
d
ed
Fe
eC
re
di
te
d
H
Civil Action No. 15‐851 (ESH)
Fe
eC
la
im
ed
H
ou
rs
C
re
di
te
d
R
at
eC
la
im
ed
R
at
eC
re
di
te
d
Page 72 of 104
ou
rs
C
la
im
or
m
ed
W
or
k
Pe
rf
ls
In
iti
a
D
at
e
Attachment to Mem. Op. [ECF No. 30]
09/15/15 AS
Telephone communication with
client
Intraoffice communication with
C. McAndrews
0.125
0.125
155.00
116.00
19.38
14.50
14.50
Rate reduced to 75%
USAO
09/15/15 JH
Review of file
materials/Intraoffice
communication regarding
Amended Complaint
Finalize same
0.375
0.375
185.00
131.00
69.38
49.13
49.13
Rate reduced to 85%
USAO
Review of correspondence from
counsel
Preparation of correspondence to
counsel
Intraoffice communication with
09/16/15 MEG J. Hardy regarding Complaint
0.500
0.500
430.00
430.00
215.00
215.00
215.00
-
0.500
0.500
185.00
131.00
92.50
65.50
65.50
Rate reduced to 85%
USAO
0.250
0.250
275.00
275.00
68.75
68.75
68.75
-
Intraoffice communication with
09/18/15 CEM M. Gehring regarding Complaint 0.125
0.125
275.00
275.00
34.38
34.38
34.38
-
Intraoffice communication with
09/18/15 MEG C. McAndrews regarding status
0.125
0.125
430.00
430.00
53.75
53.75
53.75
-
0.125
0.125
0.125
0.125
430.00
430.00
430.00
430.00
53.75
53.75
53.75
53.75
53.75
53.75
-
0.125
0.125
430.00
430.00
53.75
53.75
53.75
0.125
0.125
155.00
116.00
19.38
14.50
14.50
Rate reduced to 75%
USAO
Research regarding statute of
limitations
Intraoffice communication
09/30/15 CEM regarding same
0.250
0.250
275.00
275.00
68.75
68.75
68.75
-
Research regarding statute of
limitations and compensatory
education
Preparation of materials
09/30/15 DCM regarding same
1.250
1.250
450.00
450.00
562.50
562.50
562.50
-
Research regarding resolution
Telephone communication with
A. Finkhousen regarding case
law and resolution
Preparation of correspondence to
10/01/15 CEM A. Finkhousen regarding same 0.875
0.875
275.00
275.00
240.63
240.63
240.63
-
Review of file materials
regarding Amended Complaint
and Entry of Appearance
Finalize same
Preparation of Certificate of
09/16/15 JH
Service
Intraoffice communication with
A. Sauer regarding counseling
09/17/15 CEM and LRE
Review of file
materials/Intraoffice
09/24/15 HBK communication regarding status
09/24/15 MEG Update case status
Intraoffice communication
09/24/15 MJC regarding status
Intraoffice communication
09/24/15 AB
regarding status
N
ot
es
ar
d
A
w
A
dj
us
te
d
ed
Fe
eC
re
di
te
d
H
Civil Action No. 15‐851 (ESH)
Fe
eC
la
im
ed
H
ou
rs
C
re
di
te
d
R
at
eC
la
im
ed
R
at
eC
re
di
te
d
Page 73 of 104
ou
rs
C
la
im
or
m
ed
W
or
k
Pe
rf
ls
In
iti
a
D
at
e
Attachment to Mem. Op. [ECF No. 30]
Intraoffice communication with
C. McAndrews regarding status
Review of C. McAndrews email
10/01/15 MEG to A. Finkhousen
0.375
0.375
430.00
430.00
161.25
161.25
161.25
-
Intraoffice communication with
D.C. McAndrews regarding
Answer and resolution
Review of correspondence from
counsel
Preparation of correspondence to
10/02/15 CEM counsel
0.250
0.250
275.00
275.00
68.75
68.75
68.75
-
Review of email from Court
Intraoffice communication with
J. Hardy regarding Answer
Review of documents for call
with Court
Intraoffice communication with
J. Hardy regarding conference
call
Telephone communication with
counsel
Conference call with Court
Review of correspondence from
counsel
Preparation of correspondence to
1.625
10/02/15 MEG counsel
1.625
430.00
430.00
698.75
698.75
698.75
-
Review of file
materials/Intraoffice
communication regarding
settlement issues
10/02/15 DCM Review Answer of Defendant
0.250
0.250
450.00
450.00
112.50
112.50
112.50
-
0.250
0.125
0.250
0.125
185.00
430.00
131.00
430.00
46.25
53.75
32.75
53.75
32.75
53.75
0.125
0.125
185.00
131.00
23.13
16.38
16.38
Rate reduced to 85%
USAO
Rate reduced to 85%
USAO
0.125
0.125
275.00
275.00
34.38
34.38
34.38
-
Review of correspondences from
counsel
Preparation of correspondences
to counsel
Review of Answer
10/09/15 MEG Update case status
0.875
0.875
430.00
430.00
376.25
376.25
376.25
-
0.625
0.625
185.00
131.00
115.63
81.88
81.88
Rate reduced to 85%
USAO
Intraoffice communication with
10/15/15 CEM M. Gehring regarding resolution 0.125
0.125
275.00
275.00
34.38
34.38
34.38
-
Preparation of email to
Chambers
Review of emails regarding
conference call
10/02/15 JH
10/05/15 MEG Review of Court Order
Review of file materials
10/05/15 JH
regarding deadlines
Intraoffice communication with
M. Gehring regarding Amended
10/09/15 CEM Answer
10/11/15 JH
Review of file materials
regarding Order and deadlines
Telephone communication with
counsel, A. Finkhousen,
10/16/15 CEM regarding resolution
N
ot
es
ar
d
A
w
A
dj
us
te
d
ed
Fe
eC
re
di
te
d
H
Civil Action No. 15‐851 (ESH)
Fe
eC
la
im
ed
H
ou
rs
C
re
di
te
d
R
at
eC
la
im
ed
R
at
eC
re
di
te
d
Page 74 of 104
ou
rs
C
la
im
or
m
ed
W
or
k
Pe
rf
ls
In
iti
a
D
at
e
Attachment to Mem. Op. [ECF No. 30]
0.125
0.125
275.00
275.00
34.38
34.38
34.38
-
Review of Court Notice
10/20/15 MEG Review of Amended Complaint 0.250
0.250
430.00
430.00
107.50
107.50
107.50
-
0.125
0.125
185.00
131.00
23.13
16.38
16.38
Rate reduced to 85%
USAO
0.125
0.125
275.00
275.00
34.38
34.38
34.38
-
Review of Defendant's Motion to
10/21/15 DCM File Amended Pleadings
0.250
0.250
450.00
450.00
112.50
112.50
112.50
-
Preparation of correspondence to
DCPS regarding Compliance
Case Manager
Preparation of correspondence to
A. Anokye regarding conference
call
Review of correspondence from
0.375
10/22/15 CEM A. Anokye regarding same
0.375
275.00
275.00
103.13
103.13
103.13
-
Review of file
materials/Intraoffice
10/22/15 DCM communication regarding status 0.125
0.125
450.00
450.00
56.25
56.25
56.25
-
Intraoffice communication with
H.B. Konkler-Goldsmith, A.
Sauer regarding negotiations
Telephone communication with
10/23/15 CEM A. Anokye regarding resolution
0.250
0.250
275.00
275.00
68.75
68.75
68.75
-
0.125
0.125
430.00
430.00
53.75
53.75
53.75
-
0.125
0.125
155.00
116.00
19.38
14.50
14.50
Rate reduced to 75%
USAO
0.125
275.00
275.00
34.38
34.38
34.38
-
0.125
275.00
275.00
34.38
34.38
34.38
-
0.500
450.00
450.00
225.00
225.00
225.00
-
0.125
275.00
275.00
34.38
34.38
34.38
-
Review of file materials
regarding Motion for Leave to
File Answer to Amended
10/20/15 JH
Complaint
Intraoffice communication with
J. Hardy regarding Amended
10/21/15 CEM Answer
Intraoffice communication with
C. McAndrews and A. Sauer
10/23/15 HBK regarding negotiations
Intraoffice communication with
C. McAndrews and H.B.
Konkler-Goldsmith
10/23/15 AS
Preparation of correspondence to
10/24/15 CEM A. Anokye regarding resolution 0.125
Review of correspondence from
A. Anokye regarding conference
10/26/15 CEM call
0.125
Research regarding statute of
10/26/15 DCM limitations
0.500
Preparation of correspondence to
A. Anokye regarding conference
10/27/15 CEM call
0.125
N
ot
es
ar
d
A
w
A
dj
us
te
d
ed
Fe
eC
re
di
te
d
H
Civil Action No. 15‐851 (ESH)
Fe
eC
la
im
ed
H
ou
rs
C
re
di
te
d
R
at
eC
la
im
ed
R
at
eC
re
di
te
d
Page 75 of 104
ou
rs
C
la
im
or
m
ed
W
or
k
Pe
rf
ls
In
iti
a
D
at
e
Attachment to Mem. Op. [ECF No. 30]
Intraoffice communication with
A. Sauer regarding meeting
Telephone communication with
11/02/15 CEM A. Anokye regarding resolution
0.250
0.250
275.00
275.00
68.75
68.75
68.75
-
Intraoffice communication with
C. McAndrews
Telephone communication with
client
0.125
0.125
155.00
116.00
19.38
14.50
14.50
Rate reduced to 75%
USAO
Telephone communication with
11/03/15 CEM A. Anokye regarding resolution
0.125
0.125
275.00
275.00
34.38
34.38
34.38
-
Intraoffice communication with
C. McAndrews
Telephone communication with
client
0.125
0.125
155.00
116.00
19.38
14.50
14.50
Rate reduced to 75%
USAO
Telephone communication with
A. Anokye regarding settlement
Intraoffice communication with
11/04/15 CEM A. Sauer regarding behavior
0.250
0.250
275.00
275.00
68.75
68.75
68.75
-
0.125
0.125
155.00
116.00
19.38
14.50
14.50
Rate reduced to 75%
USAO
Telephone communication with
counsel, M. Washington,
regarding resolution
Preparation of correspondence to
0.250
11/05/15 CEM counsel regarding same
0.250
275.00
275.00
68.75
68.75
68.75
-
0.125
0.125
155.00
116.00
19.38
14.50
14.50
Rate reduced to 75%
USAO
0.125
0.125
155.00
116.00
19.38
14.50
14.50
Rate reduced to 75%
USAO
0.125
0.125
275.00
275.00
34.38
34.38
34.38
-
0.125
0.125
155.00
116.00
19.38
14.50
14.50
Rate reduced to 75%
USAO
0.250
0.250
450.00
450.00
112.50
112.50
112.50
-
Telephone communication with
client
Preparation of correspondence to
client
Intraoffice communication with
C. McAndrews
0.125
0.125
155.00
116.00
19.38
14.50
14.50
Rate reduced to 75%
USAO
11/02/15 AS
11/03/15 AS
11/04/15 AS
11/05/15 AS
Intraoffice communication with
C. McAndrews
Telephone communication with
client
Intraoffice communication with
C. McAndrews
Telephone communication with
client
Telephone communication with
client
Intraoffice communication with
11/06/15 AS
C. McAndrews
Intraoffice communication with
A. Sauer regarding
11/10/15 CEM communication with client
11/10/15 AS
Telephone communication with
client
Intraoffice communication with
C. McAndrews
Review of file
materials/Intraoffice
communication regarding
11/13/15 DCM implementation issues
11/13/15 AS
N
ot
es
ar
d
A
w
A
dj
us
te
d
ed
Fe
eC
re
di
te
d
H
Intraoffice communication with
D.C. McAndrews regarding
negotiations
Intraoffice communication with
11/13/15 CEM A. Sauer regarding IEP Meeting 0.500
Intraoffice communication with
11/16/15 AS
C. McAndrews
0.125
Civil Action No. 15‐851 (ESH)
Fe
eC
la
im
ed
H
ou
rs
C
re
di
te
d
R
at
eC
la
im
ed
R
at
eC
re
di
te
d
Page 76 of 104
ou
rs
C
la
im
or
m
ed
W
or
k
Pe
rf
ls
In
iti
a
D
at
e
Attachment to Mem. Op. [ECF No. 30]
0.250
275.00
275.00
137.50
68.75
68.75
0.125
155.00
116.00
19.38
14.50
14.50
Hours reduced (IEP)
Rate reduced to 75%
USAO
Intraoffice communication with
A. Sauer regarding behavior
meeting
Preparation of correspondence to
11/16/15 CEM client regarding same
0.375
Review of behavior reports
11/17/15 DCM Preparation for meeting
0.250
0.000
275.00
275.00
103.13
0.00
0.00
Hours reduced (noncompensable)
0.250
450.00
450.00
112.50
112.50
112.50
-
Intraoffice communication with
C. McAndrews
Review of correspondence from
client
0.125
0.125
155.00
116.00
19.38
14.50
14.50
Rate reduced to 75%
USAO
Intraoffice communication with
A. Sauer regarding behavior
meeting
Review of correspondences from
client regarding discipline and
meeting
Review of file materials
regarding behavior
Intraoffice communication with
D.C. McAndrews regarding
meeting
Preparation of correspondence to
client regarding same
Travel to and attendance at MDT
3.500
11/17/15 CEM Meeting
11/18/15 MEG Review of Court Order
0.250
0.000
0.250
275.00
430.00
275.00
430.00
962.50
107.50
0.00
107.50
0.00
107.50
Hours reduced (noncompensable)
-
Review of file materials
regarding Administrative Record 0.125
0.125
185.00
131.00
23.13
16.38
16.38
Rate reduced to 85%
USAO
0.125
0.125
450.00
450.00
56.25
56.25
56.25
-
Intraoffice communication with
D.C. McAndrews regarding IEP
Meeting
Review of correspondence from
colleague regarding transition
Preparation of correspondence to
11/19/15 CEM colleague regarding same
0.375
0.000
275.00
275.00
103.13
0.00
0.00
Hours reduced (IEP)
Review of correspondence from
colleague regarding LRE
Preparation of correspondence to
11/23/15 CEM colleague regarding same
0.125
0.125
275.00
275.00
34.38
34.38
34.38
-
11/17/15 AS
11/18/15 JH
Review of file
materials/Intraoffice
communication regarding
11/19/15 DCM implementation issues
Intraoffice communication with
H.B. Konkler-Goldsmith
11/24/15 CEM regarding appeal
N
ot
es
ar
d
A
w
A
dj
us
te
d
ed
Fe
eC
re
di
te
d
H
Civil Action No. 15‐851 (ESH)
Fe
eC
la
im
ed
H
ou
rs
C
re
di
te
d
R
at
eC
la
im
ed
R
at
eC
re
di
te
d
Page 77 of 104
ou
rs
C
la
im
or
m
ed
W
or
k
Pe
rf
ls
In
iti
a
D
at
e
Attachment to Mem. Op. [ECF No. 30]
0.125
0.125
275.00
275.00
34.38
34.38
34.38
-
0.125
0.125
430.00
430.00
53.75
53.75
53.75
-
0.125
0.125
275.00
275.00
34.38
34.38
34.38
-
0.250
0.250
275.00
275.00
68.75
68.75
68.75
-
0.375
0.375
275.00
275.00
103.13
103.13
103.13
-
Intraoffice communication with
C. McAndrews
Telephone communication with
client
0.125
0.125
155.00
116.00
19.38
14.50
14.50
Rate reduced to 75%
USAO
Review of file materials
regarding Wechsler testing
Intraoffice communication with
H.B. Konkler-Goldsmith
regarding IEE
Intraoffice communication with
12/14/15 CEM A. Sauer regarding IEE
0.375
0.125
275.00
275.00
103.13
34.38
34.38
Hours reduced (IEE)
Intraoffice communication with
D.C. McAndrews regarding
12/15/15 CEM compensatory education
0.125
0.125
275.00
275.00
34.38
34.38
34.38
-
Review of file
materials/Intraoffice
communication regarding
12/15/15 DCM settlement
0.250
0.250
450.00
450.00
112.50
112.50
112.50
-
Intraoffice communication with
A. Sauer regarding client
communication
Preparation of correspondence to
A. Allen-King regarding
0.375
12/16/15 CEM compensatory education
0.375
275.00
275.00
103.13
103.13
103.13
-
Review of file
materials/Intraoffice
communication with C.
McAndrews regarding case
11/24/15 HBK status
Intraoffice communication with
D.C. McAndrews regarding
11/30/15 CEM appeal
12/01/15 CEM Review of Amended Answer
Intraoffice communication with
D.C. McAndrews regarding
12/02/15 CEM negotiations
12/14/15 AS
Telephone communication with
client
Intraoffice communication with
C. McAndrews
0.125
0.125
155.00
116.00
19.38
14.50
14.50
Rate reduced to 75%
USAO
Telephone communication with
A. King regarding settlement
Intraoffice communication with
D.C. McAndrews regarding
same
Research regarding reading
12/17/15 CEM instruction
0.375
0.375
275.00
275.00
103.13
103.13
103.13
-
Review of file
materials/Intraoffice
communication regarding
settlement
Preparation of correspondence to
12/17/15 DCM client
0.375
0.375
450.00
450.00
168.75
168.75
168.75
-
12/16/15 AS
Intraoffice communication with
H.B. Konkler-Goldsmith
12/18/15 CEM regarding negotiations
N
ot
es
ar
d
A
w
A
dj
us
te
d
ed
Fe
eC
re
di
te
d
H
Civil Action No. 15‐851 (ESH)
Fe
eC
la
im
ed
H
ou
rs
C
re
di
te
d
R
at
eC
la
im
ed
R
at
eC
re
di
te
d
Page 78 of 104
ou
rs
C
la
im
or
m
ed
W
or
k
Pe
rf
ls
In
iti
a
D
at
e
Attachment to Mem. Op. [ECF No. 30]
0.125
0.125
275.00
275.00
34.38
34.38
34.38
-
Telephone communications with
counsel
Intraoffice communication with
12/18/15 MEG J. Hardy regarding status
0.625
0.625
430.00
430.00
268.75
268.75
268.75
-
1.375
1.375
430.00
430.00
591.25
591.25
591.25
0.125
0.125
185.00
131.00
23.13
16.38
16.38
Rate reduced to 85%
USAO
Telephone communication with
A. Allen-King regarding
settlement
Preparation of correspondence to
12/28/15 CEM A. Allen-King regarding same
0.125
0.125
275.00
275.00
34.38
34.38
34.38
-
Preparation of Motion for
Judgment
Review of transcripts
01/03/16 MEG Review of Exhibits
6.875
6.875
430.00
430.00
2,956.25
2,956.25
2,956.25
-
Intraoffice communication with
M. Gehring regarding brief
01/04/16 CEM Review of Motion for Extension 0.250
0.250
275.00
275.00
68.75
68.75
68.75
-
8.625
430.00
430.00
3,708.75
3,708.75
3,708.75
-
0.125
450.00
450.00
56.25
56.25
56.25
-
0.625
185.00
131.00
115.63
81.88
81.88
Rate reduced to 85%
USAO
Review of file materials
Intraoffice communication with
J. Hardy regarding status
12/21/15 MEG Preparation of records
Review of file materials
12/26/15 JH
regarding deadline
Intraoffice communication with
D.C. McAndrews regarding
status
Intraoffice communication with
C. McAndrews regarding same
and Motion
Correspondence with counsel, A.
Finkhousen
Preparation of Extension Motion
papers
Preparation of correspondence to
counsel
Preparation of Motion for
Judgment
Intraoffice communication with
8.625
01/04/16 MEG J. Hardy regarding filing
Preparation of Motion on
01/04/16 DCM Administrative Record
0.125
01/04/16 JH
Review of file
materials/Intraoffice
communication regarding
Motion for Extension
Preparation of Certificate of
Service
Preparation of correspondence to
Judge Huvelle
0.625
Telephone communication with
counsel, A. Finkhousen
Review of Court Order
Preparation of Motion for
01/05/16 MEG Judgment
01/06/16 CEM
01/06/16 MEG
01/06/16 JH
01/07/16 CEM
01/07/16 MEG
01/08/16 DCM
Telephone communication with
counsel, A. Allen-King,
regarding resolution
Review of file materials
regarding same
Preparation of Motion for
Judgment
Review of file materials
regarding deadlines
Preparation of correspondence to
counsel
Update case status
Review of correspondence from
client
N
ot
es
ar
d
A
w
A
dj
us
te
d
ed
Fe
eC
re
di
te
d
H
Civil Action No. 15‐851 (ESH)
Fe
eC
la
im
ed
H
ou
rs
C
re
di
te
d
R
at
eC
la
im
ed
R
at
eC
re
di
te
d
Page 79 of 104
ou
rs
C
la
im
or
m
ed
W
or
k
Pe
rf
ls
In
iti
a
D
at
e
Attachment to Mem. Op. [ECF No. 30]
6.375
6.375
430.00
430.00
2,741.25
2,741.25
2,741.25
-
0.250
0.250
275.00
275.00
68.75
68.75
68.75
-
7.750
7.750
430.00
430.00
3,332.50
3,332.50
3,332.50
0.125
0.125
185.00
131.00
23.13
16.38
16.38
Rate reduced to 85%
USAO
0.250
0.125
0.250
0.125
275.00
430.00
275.00
430.00
68.75
53.75
68.75
53.75
68.75
53.75
-
0.125
0.125
450.00
450.00
56.25
56.25
56.25
-
Review of correspondence from
A. McLaughlin regarding
reimbursement
Preparation of correspondences
to A. McLaughlin regarding
same
Intraoffice communication with
E. Gilmore regarding
reimbursement
Telephone communication with
A. Anokye regarding
compensatory education
Preparation of correspondence to
A. Anokye regarding same
Telephone communication with
client regarding settlement and
IEP Meeting
Intraoffice communication with
D.C. McAndrews, M. Gehring
and H.B. Konkler-Goldsmith
regarding settlement
Review of correspondence from
counsel, M. Washington,
regarding settlement
Preparation of correspondence to
1.125
01/13/16 CEM counsel regarding same
Preparation of Motion for
01/13/16 MEG Judgment
2.125
1.125
275.00
275.00
309.38
309.38
309.38
-
2.125
430.00
430.00
913.75
913.75
913.75
-
Review of file
materials/Intraoffice
communication regarding
01/13/16 DCM settlement and status
0.125
450.00
450.00
56.25
56.25
56.25
-
0.125
N
ot
es
ar
d
A
w
A
dj
us
te
d
ed
Fe
eC
re
di
te
d
H
Civil Action No. 15‐851 (ESH)
Fe
eC
la
im
ed
H
ou
rs
C
re
di
te
d
R
at
eC
la
im
ed
R
at
eC
re
di
te
d
Pe
k
W
or
Telephone communication with
client
Intraoffice communication with
C. McAndrews
Page 80 of 104
ou
rs
C
la
im
or
m
ed
rf
ls
In
iti
a
D
at
e
Attachment to Mem. Op. [ECF No. 30]
0.125
0.125
155.00
116.00
19.38
14.50
14.50
Rate reduced to 75%
USAO
Review of correspondence from
counsel, A. Allen-King,
regarding settlement
Preparation of correspondence to
01/14/16 CEM counsel regarding same
0.125
0.125
275.00
275.00
34.38
34.38
34.38
-
Preparation of Motion for
Judgment
01/14/16 MEG Review of email to A. Allarking 6.125
6.125
430.00
430.00
2,633.75
2,633.75
2,633.75
-
Review of file
materials/Intraoffice
communication regarding
implementation and
01/14/16 DCM compensatory education
01/13/16 AS
0.125
0.125
450.00
450.00
56.25
56.25
56.25
-
Review of correspondence from
client regarding IEP
Review of correspondence from
A. Allen-King regarding
settlement
Intraoffice communication with
D.C. McAndrews and M.
0.375
01/15/16 CEM Gehring regarding same
0.375
275.00
275.00
103.13
103.13
103.13
-
Preparation of Motion for
Judgment
Intraoffice communication with
D.C. McAndrews and C.
01/15/16 MEG McAndrews regarding status
2.250
2.250
430.00
430.00
967.50
967.50
967.50
01/15/16 JH
0.125
0.125
185.00
131.00
23.13
16.38
16.38
Rate reduced to 85%
USAO
Review of correspondence from
counsel, A. Allen-King
Review of file
materials/Intraoffice
communication regarding
01/16/16 DCM settlement
0.375
0.375
450.00
450.00
168.75
168.75
168.75
-
Preparation of Motion for
Judgment
Intraoffice communication with
D.C. McAndrews, H.B. KonklerGoldsmith, C. McAndrews and
6.250
01/17/16 MEG M. Connolly regarding Brief
6.250
430.00
430.00
2,687.50
2,687.50
2,687.50
-
0.125
275.00
275.00
34.38
34.38
34.38
-
0.250
430.00
430.00
107.50
107.50
107.50
-
1.500
430.00
430.00
645.00
645.00
645.00
-
Review of emails
Intraoffice communication with
M. Gehring and D.C.
McAndrews regarding
01/18/16 CEM Memorandum of Law
0.125
Intraoffice communication with
D.C. McAndrews regarding
01/18/16 MEG Brief
0.250
Review and revise Brief in
Support of Motion for Summary
01/18/16 MJC Judgment
1.500
N
ot
es
ar
d
ed
A
w
A
dj
us
te
d
H
Fe
eC
re
di
te
d
Pe
k
W
or
Civil Action No. 15‐851 (ESH)
Fe
eC
la
im
ed
H
ou
rs
C
re
di
te
d
R
at
eC
la
im
ed
R
at
eC
re
di
te
d
Page 81 of 104
ou
rs
C
la
im
or
m
ed
rf
ls
In
iti
a
D
at
e
Attachment to Mem. Op. [ECF No. 30]
Preparation of Memorandum for
01/18/16 DCM District Court
1.000
1.000
450.00
450.00
450.00
450.00
450.00
01/18/16 JH
0.125
0.125
185.00
131.00
23.13
16.38
16.38
Rate reduced to 85%
USAO
0.250
0.250
275.00
275.00
68.75
68.75
68.75
-
6.750
6.750
430.00
430.00
2,902.50
2,902.50
2,902.50
-
0.500
0.500
450.00
450.00
225.00
225.00
225.00
-
01/20/16 CEM Review and revise Memorandum 1.000
Preparation of Motion for
01/20/16 MEG Judgment
7.000
1.375
01/21/16 CEM Review and revise Brief
1.000
275.00
275.00
275.00
275.00
275.00
-
7.000
1.375
430.00
275.00
430.00
275.00
3,010.00
378.13
3,010.00
378.13
3,010.00
378.13
-
Preparation of Motion for
Judgment
Intraoffice communication with
C. McAndrews regarding status
Intraoffice communication with
D.C. McAndrews regarding
Brief
Intraoffice communication with
01/21/16 MEG A. Butler regarding tables
5.750
5.750
430.00
430.00
2,472.50
2,472.50
2,472.50
-
01/21/16 DCM Preparation of memorandum
1.375
1.375
450.00
450.00
618.75
618.75
618.75
01/21/16 AB
1.000
1.000
155.00
116.00
155.00
116.00
116.00
Rate reduced to 75%
USAO
5.750
5.750
430.00
430.00
2,472.50
2,472.50
2,472.50
-
1.500
1.500
450.00
450.00
675.00
675.00
675.00
-
Review of emails
Intraoffice communication with
01/19/16 CEM M. Gehring regarding case law
Additional research
Review and revise Motion for
01/19/16 MEG Judgment
Preparation of Memorandum of
01/19/16 DCM Law
Preparation of exhibits
Preparation of Motion papers
File same
Intraoffice communication with
D.C. McAndrews regarding
01/22/16 MEG Motion papers
Preparation of Memorandum of
01/22/16 DCM Law
Review of file
materials/Intraoffice
communication regarding
Motion for Summary Judgment
Preparation of correspondence to
Judge Huvelle
Preparation of Certificate of
Service
Finalize Motion
Review of Exhibits
1.125
01/22/16 JH
Intraoffice communication with
D.C. McAndrews regarding
01/25/16 CEM appeal
0.125
1.125
185.00
131.00
208.13
147.38
147.38
Rate reduced to 85%
USAO
0.125
275.00
275.00
34.38
34.38
34.38
-
Intraoffice communication with
H.B. Konkler-Goldsmith
01/27/16 CEM regarding settlement
0.125
275.00
275.00
34.38
34.38
34.38
-
0.125
N
ot
es
ar
d
ed
A
w
A
dj
us
te
d
H
Fe
eC
re
di
te
d
Pe
k
W
or
Civil Action No. 15‐851 (ESH)
Fe
eC
la
im
ed
H
ou
rs
C
re
di
te
d
R
at
eC
la
im
ed
R
at
eC
re
di
te
d
Page 82 of 104
ou
rs
C
la
im
or
m
ed
rf
ls
In
iti
a
D
at
e
Attachment to Mem. Op. [ECF No. 30]
Intraoffice communication with
C. McAndrews regarding
01/27/16 HBK settlement
0.125
0.125
430.00
430.00
53.75
53.75
53.75
-
Intraoffice communication with
H.B. Konkler-Goldsmith
regarding settlement
0.125
0.125
155.00
116.00
19.38
14.50
14.50
Rate reduced to 75%
USAO
0.125
0.125
430.00
430.00
53.75
53.75
53.75
-
Intraoffice communication
regarding Case Status - Motion
filed, awaiting response
0.250
0.250
430.00
430.00
107.50
107.50
107.50
-
01/27/16 AS
Review of file
materials/Intraoffice
communication regarding
01/28/16 HBK settlement issues
01/28/16 MJC
Review of file
materials/Intraoffice
communication regarding
01/28/16 DCM settlement issues
0.125
0.125
450.00
450.00
56.25
56.25
56.25
-
01/28/16 JH
Review of file
materials/Intraoffice
communication regarding
settlement issues
0.125
0.125
185.00
131.00
23.13
16.38
16.38
Rate reduced to 85%
USAO
01/29/16 AB
Intraoffice communication
regarding Motion and Response 0.250
0.250
155.00
116.00
38.75
29.00
29.00
01/29/16 JH
Review of emails
0.125
0.125
185.00
131.00
23.13
16.38
16.38
Rate reduced to 75%
USAO
Rate reduced to 85%
USAO
Review of file materials
regarding evaluations and IEP
Intraoffice communication with
D.C. McAndrews regarding
01/29/16 CEM same and IEP Meeting
3.875
0.000
275.00
275.00
1,065.63
0.00
0.00
Hours reduced (IEP)
Intraoffice communication with
D.C. McAndrews and C.
01/29/16 MEG McAndrews regarding IEP
0.125
0.000
430.00
430.00
53.75
0.00
0.00
Hours reduced (IEP)
Review of file materials
regarding IEP Meeting
Telephone communication with
01/31/16 CEM client regarding same
0.250
0.000
275.00
275.00
68.75
0.00
0.00
Hours reduced (IEP)
Telephone communication with
client
Intraoffice communication with
C. McAndrews
0.125
0.125
155.00
116.00
19.38
14.50
14.50
Rate reduced to 75%
USAO
Telephone communication with
client
Preparation of notes to file
Intraoffice communication with
H.B. Konkler-Goldsmith
regarding Due Process Hearing
Intraoffice communication with
02/01/16 CEM A. Sauer regarding IEP Meeting 0.875
0.500
275.00
275.00
240.63
137.50
137.50
Hours reduced (IEP)
02/01/16 AS
N
ot
es
ar
d
A
w
A
dj
us
te
d
ed
Fe
eC
re
di
te
d
H
Civil Action No. 15‐851 (ESH)
Fe
eC
la
im
ed
H
ou
rs
C
re
di
te
d
R
at
eC
la
im
ed
R
at
eC
re
di
te
d
Page 83 of 104
ou
rs
C
la
im
or
m
ed
W
or
k
Pe
rf
ls
In
iti
a
D
at
e
Attachment to Mem. Op. [ECF No. 30]
Intraoffice communication with
D.C. McAndrews and C.
02/01/16 MEG McAndrews regarding IEP
0.125
0.000
430.00
430.00
53.75
0.00
0.00
Hours reduced (IEP)
Intraoffice communication with
C. McAndrews
Telephone communication with
client
0.125
0.125
155.00
116.00
19.38
14.50
14.50
Rate reduced to 75%
USAO
Intraoffice communication with
02/02/16 CEM A. Sauer regarding IEP Meeting 0.125
0.000
275.00
275.00
34.38
0.00
0.00
Hours reduced (IEP)
0.125
155.00
116.00
19.38
14.50
14.50
Rate reduced to 75%
USAO
02/02/16 AS
02/04/16 AS
Intraoffice communication with
C. McAndrews
Telephone communication with
client regarding conference call
0.125
Telephone communications with
client regarding IEP Meeting
Intraoffice communication with
M. Acosta and A. Sauer
regarding conference call
Telephone communication with
counsel, A. Finkhousen,
0.625
02/04/16 CEM regarding settlement
Review of file materials
02/05/16 CEM regarding IEP Meeting
0.500
0.500
275.00
275.00
171.88
137.50
137.50
Hours reduced (IEP)
0.000
275.00
275.00
137.50
0.00
0.00
Hours reduced (IEP)
Preparation of correspondence to
client regarding meeting
Review of correspondence from
client regarding same
Telephone communication with
client regarding meeting
Travel to and attendance at client
1.750
02/06/16 CEM meeting regarding IEP
0.000
275.00
275.00
481.25
0.00
0.00
Hours reduced (IEP)
0.125
0.125
155.00
116.00
19.38
14.50
14.50
Rate reduced to 75%
USAO
Intraoffice communication with
A. Sauer regarding IEP Meeting
Preparation of correspondence to
counsel
Intraoffice communication with
D.C. McAndrews regarding IEP
0.750
02/08/16 CEM Meeting
0.000
275.00
275.00
206.25
0.00
0.00
Hours reduced (IEP)
0.125
155.00
116.00
19.38
14.50
14.50
Rate reduced to 75%
USAO
02/08/16 AS
02/09/16 AS
Telephone communication with
client
Intraoffice communication with
C. McAndrews
Telephone communication with
client
Intraoffice communication with
C. McAndrews
0.125
N
ot
es
ar
d
A
w
A
dj
us
te
d
ed
Fe
eC
re
di
te
d
H
Civil Action No. 15‐851 (ESH)
Fe
eC
la
im
ed
H
ou
rs
C
re
di
te
d
R
at
eC
la
im
ed
R
at
eC
re
di
te
d
Page 84 of 104
ou
rs
C
la
im
or
m
ed
W
or
k
Pe
rf
ls
In
iti
a
D
at
e
Attachment to Mem. Op. [ECF No. 30]
Intraoffice communication with
D.C. McAndrews regarding
settlement
Preparation of correspondence to
counsel
Intraoffice communication with
A. Sauer regarding IEP meeting
Telephone communication with
0.625
02/09/16 CEM counsel
0.500
275.00
275.00
171.88
137.50
137.50
Hours reduced (IEP)
Review of file
materials/Intraoffice
communication regarding
02/11/16 DCM settlement
0.250
0.250
450.00
450.00
112.50
112.50
112.50
-
0.125
0.125
155.00
116.00
19.38
14.50
14.50
Rate reduced to 75%
USAO
Intraoffice communication with
A. Sauer regarding IEP Meeting,
02/11/16 CEM exclusion, IEP and field trip
0.500
0.000
275.00
275.00
137.50
0.00
0.00
Hours reduced (IEP)
Review of correspondences from
counsel, A. Finkhousen,
regarding settlement
Preparation of correspondences
to counsel regarding same
Intraoffice communication with
D.C. McAndrews regarding
settlement
Telephone communications with
0.750
02/12/16 CEM counsel regarding same
0.750
275.00
275.00
206.25
206.25
206.25
-
Review of correspondences from
counsel, A. Finkhousen
Intraoffice communication with
02/12/16 MEG C. McAndrews regarding same 0.375
0.375
430.00
430.00
161.25
161.25
161.25
-
0.375
450.00
450.00
168.75
168.75
168.75
0.125
185.00
131.00
23.13
16.38
16.38
Rate reduced to 85%
USAO
0.00
Hours reduced (IEP);
Rate reduced to 75%
USAO
02/11/16 AS
Telephone communication with
client
Intraoffice communication with
C. McAndrews
Review of multiple emails of A.
Finkhousen, C. McAndrews
Review of file
materials/Intraoffice
communication regarding
0.375
02/12/16 DCM settlement
Review of file materials
02/15/16 JH
regarding deadlines
0.125
02/17/16 AS
Telephone communication with
client regarding IEP
Intraoffice communication with
C. McAndrews
0.125
0.000
155.00
116.00
19.38
0.00
N
ot
es
ar
d
A
w
A
dj
us
te
d
Fe
eC
re
di
te
d
ed
Civil Action No. 15‐851 (ESH)
Fe
eC
la
im
ou
rs
C
la
im
ed
H
ou
rs
C
re
di
te
d
R
at
eC
la
im
ed
R
at
eC
re
di
te
d
Page 85 of 104
H
or
m
ed
W
or
k
Pe
rf
ls
In
iti
a
D
at
e
Attachment to Mem. Op. [ECF No. 30]
Intraoffice communication with
A. Sauer regarding IEP Meeting
and field trip
Review of correspondence from
colleague regarding negotiations
Preparation of correspondence to
colleague regarding same
Research regarding placement
Telephone communication with
0.875
02/17/16 CEM regarding mental health
0.125
275.00
275.00
240.63
34.38
34.38
Hours reduced (noncompensable)
Telephone communications with
client regarding mental health
02/18/16 CEM and residence
0.500
0.000
275.00
275.00
137.50
0.00
0.00
Hours reduced (noncompensable)
Review of correspondence from
counsel, A. Finkhousen
Review of correspondence to
counsel
02/19/16 MEG Update case status
0.375
0.375
430.00
430.00
161.25
161.25
161.25
-
Review of correspondence from
counsel, A. Finkhousen
Review of file
materials/Intraoffice
communication regarding
02/19/16 DCM settlement
0.500
0.500
450.00
450.00
225.00
225.00
225.00
-
Review of correspondences from
counsel, A. Finkhousen,
regarding settlement
Intraoffice communication with
D.C. McAndrews regarding
same
Preparation of correspondence to
counsel regarding settlement
Preparation of correspondence to
N. Gregorson regarding
compensatory education
Review of correspondence from
N. Gregorson regarding same
Telephone communication with
1.125
02/19/16 CEM client regarding IEP Meeting
1.000
275.00
275.00
309.38
275.00
275.00
Hours reduced (IEP)
N
ot
es
ar
d
A
w
A
dj
us
te
d
ed
Fe
eC
re
di
te
d
H
Correspondence with N.
Gregorson regarding
compensatory education
Intraoffice communication with
D.C. McAndrews regarding
same
Telephone communication with
client regarding compensatory
education
Preparation of correspondence to
counsel, A. Finkhousen,
regarding same
Intraoffice communication with
A. Sauer regarding evaluation
Intraoffice communication with
D.C. McAndrews regarding
0.750
02/22/16 CEM educational needs
Civil Action No. 15‐851 (ESH)
Fe
eC
la
im
ed
H
ou
rs
C
re
di
te
d
R
at
eC
la
im
ed
R
at
eC
re
di
te
d
Page 86 of 104
ou
rs
C
la
im
or
m
ed
W
or
k
Pe
rf
ls
In
iti
a
D
at
e
Attachment to Mem. Op. [ECF No. 30]
0.750
275.00
275.00
206.25
206.25
206.25
-
0.125
0.125
450.00
450.00
56.25
56.25
56.25
0.125
0.125
155.00
116.00
19.38
14.50
14.50
Rate reduced to 75%
USAO
0.125
0.000
275.00
275.00
34.38
0.00
0.00
Hours reduced (IEP)
0.250
0.000
275.00
275.00
68.75
0.00
0.00
Hours reduced (IEP)
Review Brief of DCPS regarding
Judgment on Administrative
Record
02/24/16 DCM Review IEP or ER
1.000
0.750
450.00
450.00
450.00
337.50
337.50
Hours reduced (IEP)
Review of file
materials/Intraoffice
communication regarding
02/22/16 DCM settlement
Intraoffice communication with
02/22/16 AS
C. McAndrews
Intraoffice communication with
02/23/16 CEM A. Sauer regarding IEP
Intraoffice communication with
A. Sauer regarding IEP Meeting
02/24/16 CEM and IEP
Intraoffice communication with
C. McAndrews
Telephone communication with
client
0.125
0.000
155.00
116.00
19.38
0.00
0.00
Hours reduced (IEP);
Rate reduced to 75%
USAO
02/26/16 MEG Preparation of Response Brief
0.375
0.375
430.00
430.00
161.25
161.25
161.25
-
02/27/16 MEG Preparation of Response Brief
1.500
1.500
430.00
430.00
645.00
645.00
645.00
-
Intraoffice communication with
A. Sauer regarding IEP
Intraoffice communication with
02/27/16 CEM J. Hardy regarding alerts
0.250
0.000
275.00
275.00
68.75
0.00
0.00
Hours reduced (IEP)
02/29/16 MEG Preparation of Response Brief
6.750
6.750
430.00
430.00
2,902.50
2,902.50
2,902.50
-
Intraoffice communication with
H.B. Konkler-Goldsmith
regarding settlement
Review of correspondence from
client
Intraoffice communication with
0.375
02/29/16 CEM A. Sauer regarding records
0.250
275.00
275.00
103.13
68.75
68.75
Hours reduced (IEP)
02/24/16 AS
Telephone communication with
client regarding IEP and FBA
Intraoffice communication with
C. McAndrews
N
ot
es
ar
d
A
w
A
dj
us
te
d
ed
Fe
eC
re
di
te
d
H
Civil Action No. 15‐851 (ESH)
Fe
eC
la
im
ed
H
ou
rs
C
re
di
te
d
R
at
eC
la
im
ed
R
at
eC
re
di
te
d
Page 87 of 104
ou
rs
C
la
im
or
m
ed
W
or
k
Pe
rf
ls
In
iti
a
D
at
e
Attachment to Mem. Op. [ECF No. 30]
0.125
0.000
155.00
116.00
19.38
0.00
0.00
Hours reduced (IEP);
Rate reduced to 75%
USAO
Preparation of Response Brief
Intraoffice communication with
D.C. McAndrews, M. Connolly,
H.B. Konkler-Goldsmith and C.
McAndrews regarding Brief
Intraoffice communication with
03/01/16 MEG A. Butler regarding Brief
7.625
7.625
430.00
430.00
3,278.75
3,278.75
3,278.75
-
02/29/16 AS
Telephone communication with
client regarding IEP
Intraoffice communication with
C. McAndrews regarding same
0.125
0.000
155.00
116.00
19.38
0.00
0.00
Hours reduced (IEP);
Rate reduced to 75%
USAO
Intraoffice communication with
C. McAndrews regarding status
Review of correspondence from
03/02/16 MEG counsel, A. Finkhousen
0.500
1.375
03/02/16 MJC Review and revise Response
0.500
1.375
430.00
430.00
430.00
430.00
215.00
591.25
215.00
591.25
215.00
591.25
-
Intraoffice communication with
A. Sauer regarding IEP Meeting
and IEP
Telephone communication with
client regarding same
Intraoffice communication with
M. Gehring regarding settlement
Review of correspondence from
counsel, A. Finkhousen,
regarding compensatory
0.875
03/02/16 CEM education
0.375
275.00
275.00
240.63
103.13
103.13
Hours reduced (IEP)
03/01/16 AS
Intraoffice communication with
C. McAndrews
Telephone communication with
client regarding IEP
0.125
0.000
155.00
116.00
19.38
0.00
0.00
Hours reduced (IEP);
Rate reduced to 75%
USAO
Preparation of Response Brief
Intraoffice communication with
C. McAndrews and D.C.
McAndrews regarding
compensatory education and
03/03/16 MEG cases
9.000
9.000
430.00
430.00
3,870.00
3,870.00
3,870.00
-
0.00
Hours reduced
(Evaluation); Rate
reduced to 75% USAO
03/02/16 AS
03/03/16 AS
Telephone communication with
client regarding evaluation
Intraoffice communication with
C. McAndrews regarding same
0.125
0.000
155.00
116.00
19.38
0.00
N
ot
es
ar
d
A
w
A
dj
us
te
d
ed
Fe
eC
re
di
te
d
H
Intraoffice communication with
M. Gehring regarding settlement
Intraoffice communication with
D.C. McAndrews and M.
Gehring regarding appeal and
IEE
Review of file materials
regarding Reply Brief
Intraoffice communication with
A. Sauer regarding Lindamood
Bell and evaluation
Review and revise Brief
Review of case law regarding
Brief
Research regarding Lindamood
Bell
Telephone communication with
N. Gregorson resolution same
Telephone communication with
4.625
03/03/16 CEM H. Cohen regarding IEE
Civil Action No. 15‐851 (ESH)
Fe
eC
la
im
ed
H
ou
rs
C
re
di
te
d
R
at
eC
la
im
ed
R
at
eC
re
di
te
d
Page 88 of 104
ou
rs
C
la
im
or
m
ed
W
or
k
Pe
rf
ls
In
iti
a
D
at
e
Attachment to Mem. Op. [ECF No. 30]
3.500
275.00
275.00
1,271.88
962.50
962.50
Hours reduced (IEE)
Preparation of Response Brief
03/03/16 DCM Review of IEP and IEE
Review of final response to
03/04/16 MJC Motion for Judgment
1.750
1.380
450.00
450.00
787.50
621.00
621.00
Hours reduced (IEP)
0.375
0.375
430.00
430.00
161.25
161.25
161.25
-
Preparation of Response Brief
Preparation of materials for
03/04/16 DCM Evaluator
0.750
0.750
450.00
450.00
337.50
337.50
337.50
-
Review of emails
Intraoffice communication
regarding Plaintiffs' Opposition
Preparation of Certificate of
Service
Preparation of correspondence to
Judge Huvelle
Finalize Plaintiffs' Opposition
Review of file materials
regarding same
1.250
1.250
185.00
131.00
231.25
163.75
163.75
Rate reduced to 85%
USAO
1.375
275.00
275.00
412.50
378.13
378.13
Hours reduced (IEE)
03/04/16 JH
Review and revise Brief
Intraoffice communication with
D.C. McAndrews regarding
03/04/16 CEM same and IEE
1.500
N
ot
es
ar
d
A
w
A
dj
us
te
d
ed
Fe
eC
re
di
te
d
H
Civil Action No. 15‐851 (ESH)
Fe
eC
la
im
ed
H
ou
rs
C
re
di
te
d
R
at
eC
la
im
ed
R
at
eC
re
di
te
d
Page 89 of 104
ou
rs
C
la
im
or
m
ed
W
or
k
Pe
rf
ls
In
iti
a
D
at
e
Attachment to Mem. Op. [ECF No. 30]
Review, revise and finalize Brief
Intraoffice communication with
J. Hardy regarding filing
Intraoffice communication with
A. Butler regarding tables
Research regarding IEP
Intraoffice communication with
D.C. McAndrews regarding
8.375
03/04/16 MEG Brief
8.000
430.00
430.00
3,601.25
3,440.00
3,440.00
Hours reduced (IEP)
Intraoffice communication with
03/07/16 CEM A. Sauer regarding evaluation
0.000
275.00
275.00
34.38
0.00
0.00
Hours reduced
(Evaluation)
0.125
Telephone communication with
client regarding evaluation
Intraoffice communication with
03/07/16 AS
C. McAndrews
0.125
Review of C. McAndrews email
03/08/16 MEG to A. Finkhousen
0.125
Intraoffice communication with
C. McAndrews regarding
evaluation
Telephone communication with
client
0.000
155.00
116.00
19.38
0.00
0.00
Hours reduced
(Evaluation); Rate
reduced to 75% USAO
0.125
430.00
430.00
53.75
53.75
53.75
-
0.125
0.000
155.00
116.00
19.38
0.00
0.00
Hours reduced
(Evaluation); Rate
reduced to 75% USAO
Intraoffice communication with
A. Sauer regarding settlement
Telephone communications with
client regarding paperwork, IEP
and evaluation
Preparation of correspondence to
counsel, A. Finkhousen,
regarding settlement and
1.125
03/08/16 CEM compensatory education
0.125
275.00
275.00
309.38
34.38
34.38
Hours reduced (IEP)
03/08/16 AS
Review of correspondence from
counsel, A. Finkhousen,
0.125
03/09/16 DCM regarding settlement
Intraoffice communication with
C. McAndrews regarding IEP
and FBA
0.125
03/09/16 AS
0.125
450.00
450.00
56.25
56.25
56.25
0.000
155.00
116.00
19.38
0.00
0.00
Hours reduced (IEP);
Rate reduced to 75%
USAO
Telephone communication with
client regarding meeting
Meeting with client regarding
IEP, evaluations, exclusions and
placement
Preparation of correspondence to
H. Cohen regarding IEE
Review of correspondence from
Hearing Officer H. Cohen
4.125
03/09/16 CEM regarding same
0.000
275.00
275.00
1,134.38
0.00
0.00
Hours reduced (IEP)
0.000
275.00
275.00
34.38
N
ot
es
ar
d
A
w
A
dj
us
te
d
ed
0.00
Fe
eC
re
di
te
d
H
Review of correspondence from
School District regarding
03/10/16 CEM medical referral
0.125
Civil Action No. 15‐851 (ESH)
Fe
eC
la
im
ed
H
ou
rs
C
re
di
te
d
R
at
eC
la
im
ed
R
at
eC
re
di
te
d
Page 90 of 104
ou
rs
C
la
im
or
m
ed
W
or
k
Pe
rf
ls
In
iti
a
D
at
e
Attachment to Mem. Op. [ECF No. 30]
0.00
Hours reduced (noncompensable)
Telephone communication with
client regarding evaluation
Intraoffice communication with
C. McAndrews
0.125
0.000
155.00
116.00
19.38
0.00
0.00
Hours reduced
(Evaluation); Rate
reduced to 75% USAO
Intraoffice communication with
03/15/16 MEG J. Hardy regarding Brief
0.125
0.125
430.00
430.00
53.75
53.75
53.75
-
0.250
0.250
185.00
131.00
46.25
32.75
32.75
Rate reduced to 85%
USAO
Review of correspondence from
N. Gregorson regarding
evaluation
Preparation of correspondence to
N. Gregorson regarding same
Intraoffice communication with
A. Sauer regarding evaluation
Review of correspondence from
Lindamood Bell regarding same
Intraoffice communication with
D.C. McAndrews regarding
0.750
03/15/16 CEM Complaint
0.130
275.00
275.00
206.25
35.75
35.75
Hours reduced
(Evaluation)
0.125
0.125
155.00
116.00
19.38
14.50
14.50
Rate reduced to 75%
USAO
Intraoffice communication with
A. Sauer regarding evaluation
and records
Review of correspondence from
Lindamood Bell regarding
evaluation
Review of correspondence from
client regarding behavior and
0.500
03/16/16 CEM speech services
0.000
275.00
275.00
137.50
0.00
0.00
Hours reduced
(Evaluation)
Intraoffice communication with
A. Sauer regarding evaluation
Research regarding
transportation and discipline
Intraoffice communication with
J. Hardy regarding Defendant's
03/17/16 CEM Opposition Brief
03/17/16 MEG Review of Reply Brief
0.375
0.250
0.375
0.250
275.00
430.00
275.00
430.00
103.13
107.50
103.13
107.50
103.13
107.50
-
Review of file materials
regarding School District's Reply 0.125
0.125
185.00
131.00
23.13
16.38
16.38
Rate reduced to 85%
USAO
03/14/16 AS
03/15/16 JH
03/16/16 AS
03/17/16 JH
Review of file materials
regarding Summary Judgment
Motion and Department of
Revenue check
Telephone communication with
client
Intraoffice communication with
C. McAndrews
Review of correspondence from
client
Intraoffice communication with
C. McAndrews
0.125
Intraoffice communication with
A. Sauer regarding evaluation
and behavior
Review of file materials
regarding transportation and
03/18/16 CEM discipline
0.500
Intraoffice communication with
A. Sauer regarding behavior and
03/21/16 CEM evaluation
0.125
N
ot
es
ar
d
A
w
A
dj
us
te
d
Fe
eC
re
di
te
d
ed
Civil Action No. 15‐851 (ESH)
Fe
eC
la
im
ed
H
ou
rs
C
re
di
te
d
R
at
eC
la
im
ed
R
at
eC
re
di
te
d
H
Telephone communication with
client regarding IEP
Intraoffice communication with
03/17/16 AS
C. McAndrews
0.125
Research regarding cases for
possible Reply Brief Order Oral
03/18/16 DCM Argument
0.125
03/18/16 AS
Page 91 of 104
ou
rs
C
la
im
or
m
ed
W
or
k
Pe
rf
ls
In
iti
a
D
at
e
Attachment to Mem. Op. [ECF No. 30]
0.000
155.00
116.00
19.38
0.00
0.00
Hours reduced (IEP);
Rate reduced to 75%
USAO
0.125
450.00
450.00
56.25
56.25
56.25
-
0.125
155.00
116.00
19.38
14.50
14.50
Rate reduced to 75%
USAO
0.000
275.00
275.00
137.50
0.00
0.00
Hours reduced
(Evaluation)
0.000
275.00
275.00
34.38
0.00
0.00
Hours reduced
(Evaluation)
Telephone communication with
client regarding evaluation
Intraoffice communication with
C. McAndrews
0.125
0.000
155.00
116.00
19.38
0.00
0.00
Hours reduced
(Evaluation); Rate
reduced to 75% USAO
Intraoffice communication with
03/22/16 CEM A. Sauer regarding evaluation
0.250
0.000
275.00
275.00
68.75
0.00
0.00
Hours reduced
(Evaluation)
03/21/16 AS
Telephone communication with
client regarding evaluation
Intraoffice communication with
C. McAndrews
0.125
03/22/16 AS
Intraoffice communication with
D.C. McAndrews regarding Oral
0.125
03/23/16 MEG Argument
Review of School District Reply
Memorandum
Research, preparation for
possible oral argument
Review of file
materials/Intraoffice
communication regarding use of
0.625
03/23/16 DCM compensatory education
03/23/16 AS
Telephone communication with
client regarding evaluation
Intraoffice communication with
C. McAndrews
0.125
0.000
155.00
116.00
19.38
0.00
0.00
Hours reduced
(Evaluation); Rate
reduced to 75% USAO
0.125
430.00
430.00
53.75
53.75
53.75
-
0.625
450.00
450.00
281.25
281.25
281.25
-
0.00
Hours reduced
(Evaluation); Rate
reduced to 75% USAO
0.000
155.00
116.00
19.38
0.00
N
ot
es
ar
d
ed
A
w
A
dj
us
te
d
H
Fe
eC
re
di
te
d
Pe
k
W
or
Civil Action No. 15‐851 (ESH)
Fe
eC
la
im
ed
H
ou
rs
C
re
di
te
d
R
at
eC
la
im
ed
R
at
eC
re
di
te
d
Page 92 of 104
ou
rs
C
la
im
or
m
ed
rf
ls
In
iti
a
D
at
e
Attachment to Mem. Op. [ECF No. 30]
Telephone communications with
client regarding evaluation
Intraoffice communication with
A. Sauer regarding same
Review of correspondence from
H. Cohen regarding IEE
Preparation of correspondence to
H. Cohen regarding same
Intraoffice communication with
D.C. McAndrews and M.
Gehring regarding Oral
Argument and evaluation
Research regarding appeal
Review of correspondence from
2.000
03/23/16 CEM client regarding evaluation
0.130
275.00
275.00
550.00
35.75
35.75
Hours reduced (IEE)
Intraoffice communication with
03/24/16 HBK C. McAndrews regarding status
0.250
430.00
430.00
107.50
107.50
107.50
-
Telephone communication with
client regarding evaluation
Intraoffice communication with
C. McAndrews
0.250
0.125
0.000
155.00
131.00
19.38
0.00
0.00
Hours reduced
(Evaluation); Rate
reduced to 85% USAO
Intraoffice communication with
H.B. Konkler-Goldsmith
regarding referral
Intraoffice communication with
A. Sauer regarding evaluations
and records
Review of file materials
regarding same, IEP and
meetings
Telephone communication with
Mr. Jones regarding observations
Intraoffice communication with
M. Gehring and D.C.
1.750
03/24/16 CEM McAndrews regarding appeal
0.130
275.00
275.00
481.25
35.75
35.75
Hours reduced (IEP)
Intraoffice communication with
C. McAndrews and D.C.
03/24/16 MEG McAndrews regarding status
03/24/16 AS
0.250
0.000
430.00
430.00
107.50
0.00
0.00
Hours reduced (IEP)
Preparation of Request for
Hearing
Preparation of correspondence to
1.250
03/28/16 MEG counsel
1.250
430.00
430.00
537.50
537.50
537.50
03/28/16 JH
0.125
185.00
131.00
23.13
16.38
16.38
Rate reduced to 85%
USAO
Review of emails
0.125
Review of correspondence from
03/30/16 CEM client regarding evaluation
0.125
Intraoffice communication with
D.C. McAndrews regarding
04/01/16 MEG Motion
0.125
N
ot
es
ar
d
A
w
A
dj
us
te
d
ed
Fe
eC
re
di
te
d
H
Intraoffice communication with
A. Sauer regarding IEE
Preparation of correspondence to
H. Cohen regarding same
Intraoffice communication with
03/28/16 CEM M. Gehring regarding Hearing
0.500
Intraoffice communication with
03/28/16 AS
C. McAndrews
0.500
03/30/16 MEG Update case status
0.125
Civil Action No. 15‐851 (ESH)
Fe
eC
la
im
ed
H
ou
rs
C
re
di
te
d
R
at
eC
la
im
ed
R
at
eC
re
di
te
d
Page 93 of 104
ou
rs
C
la
im
or
m
ed
W
or
k
Pe
rf
ls
In
iti
a
D
at
e
Attachment to Mem. Op. [ECF No. 30]
0.130
275.00
275.00
137.50
35.75
35.75
Hours reduced (IEE)
0.000
0.125
155.00
430.00
116.00
430.00
77.50
53.75
0.00
53.75
0.00
53.75
Hours reduced (IEE)
-
0.000
275.00
275.00
34.38
0.00
0.00
Hours reduced
(Evaluation)
0.125
430.00
430.00
53.75
53.75
53.75
-
Preparation of Motion for Oral
Argument
Review Answer of School
04/01/16 DCM District
Review of file materials
regarding Motion for Oral
04/01/16 JH
Argument
0.625
0.625
450.00
450.00
281.25
281.25
281.25
-
0.125
0.125
185.00
131.00
23.13
16.38
16.38
Rate reduced to 85%
USAO
Review and edit Motion
Intraoffice communication with
04/04/16 CEM M. Connolly regarding Motion
0.375
0.375
275.00
275.00
103.13
103.13
103.13
-
0.125
430.00
430.00
53.75
53.75
53.75
-
0.250
430.00
430.00
107.50
107.50
107.50
-
0.125
275.00
275.00
34.38
34.38
34.38
-
0.750
430.00
430.00
322.50
322.50
322.50
-
0.875
185.00
131.00
161.88
114.63
114.63
Rate reduced to 85%
USAO
0.000
450.00
450.00
112.50
0.00
0.00
Hours reduced (noncompensable)
0.00
Hours reduced
(Evaluation); Rate
reduced to 75% USAO
Intraoffice communication with
04/04/16 MEG C. McAndrews regarding Motion 0.125
Review and revise Motion for
04/04/16 MJC Oral Argument
0.250
Intraoffice communication with
J. Hardy regarding
0.125
04/05/16 CEM correspondence to Court
Intraoffice communication with
J. Hardy and E. Gilmore
regarding admission
Research regarding same
Finalize Motion for Oral
04/05/16 MEG Argument
0.750
Review of file materials
regarding Motion for Oral
Argument
Finalize same
Preparation of Certificate of
Service
Preparation of correspondence to
Clerk, USDC
0.875
04/05/16 JH
Review of correspondence from
client regarding implementation
0.250
04/05/16 DCM issues
04/06/16 AS
Intraoffice communication with
C. McAndrews regarding
evaluations
0.250
0.000
155.00
116.00
38.75
0.00
N
ot
es
ar
d
A
w
A
dj
us
te
d
ed
Fe
eC
re
di
te
d
H
Civil Action No. 15‐851 (ESH)
Fe
eC
la
im
ed
H
ou
rs
C
re
di
te
d
R
at
eC
la
im
ed
R
at
eC
re
di
te
d
Page 94 of 104
ou
rs
C
la
im
or
m
ed
W
or
k
Pe
rf
ls
In
iti
a
D
at
e
Attachment to Mem. Op. [ECF No. 30]
Review of correspondence from
H. Cohen regarding IEE
Preparation of correspondence to
04/06/16 CEM H. Cohen regarding same
0.125
0.000
275.00
275.00
34.38
0.00
0.00
Hours reduced (IEE)
Review of correspondences from
H. Cohen regarding IEE
Intraoffice communication with
A. Sauer regarding same
Preparation of correspondence to
04/06/16 CEM H. Cohen regarding IEE
0.250
0.000
275.00
275.00
68.75
0.00
0.00
Hours reduced (IEE)
Intraoffice communication with
H.B. Konkler-Goldsmith
regarding Federal Court and
04/07/16 CEM referral
0.125
0.125
275.00
275.00
34.38
34.38
34.38
-
Intraoffice communication with
C. McAndrews regarding Federal
04/07/16 HBK Court and referral
0.125
0.125
430.00
430.00
53.75
53.75
53.75
-
Review of correspondence from
04/10/16 DCM counsel, A. Finkhousen
0.125
0.125
450.00
450.00
56.25
56.25
56.25
-
Intraoffice communication with
J. Hardy regarding status
Review of correspondence from
0.250
04/11/16 MEG counsel, A. Finkhousen
0.250
430.00
430.00
107.50
107.50
107.50
-
0.125
0.125
185.00
131.00
23.13
16.38
16.38
Rate reduced to 85%
USAO
0.125
0.125
450.00
450.00
56.25
56.25
56.25
-
Review of correspondence from
counsel, A. Finkhousen,
regarding compensatory
education
Review of correspondence from
H. Cohen regarding IEE
Preparation of correspondence to
0.250
04/12/16 CEM H. Cohen regarding same
0.130
275.00
275.00
68.75
35.75
35.75
Hours reduced (IEE)
04/11/16 JH
Review of file materials
regarding Defendant's
Opposition to Motion for
Hearing
Review of Defendant's
04/12/16 DCM Opposition to Oral Argument
Review of Motion in Opposition
of Oral Argument
Preparation of correspondence to
counsel
Preparation of correspondence to
N. Gregorson regarding
compensatory education
Intraoffice communication with
A. Sauer regarding same
Review of correspondence from
0.500
04/13/16 CEM counsel
0.500
275.00
275.00
137.50
137.50
137.50
0.125
0.125
450.00
450.00
56.25
56.25
56.25
-
Intraoffice communication with
M. Gehring, H.B. KonklerGoldsmith and D.C. McAndrews
regarding program and case law
Intraoffice communication with
A. Sauer regarding evaluation
Intraoffice communication with
D.C. McAndrews regarding Oral
Argument
Intraoffice communication with
H.B. Konkler-Goldsmith
regarding Federal Court and
compensatory education
Review of correspondence from
N. Gregorson regarding
evaluation
Preparation of correspondence to
0.750
04/14/16 CEM N. Gregorson regarding same
0.750
275.00
275.00
206.25
206.25
206.25
-
04/14/16 DCM Review of recent case law
N
ot
-
Review of file
materials/Intraoffice
communication regarding
compensatory education
04/13/16 DCM transportation
es
ar
d
A
w
A
dj
us
te
d
ed
Fe
eC
re
di
te
d
H
Civil Action No. 15‐851 (ESH)
Fe
eC
la
im
ed
H
ou
rs
C
re
di
te
d
R
at
eC
la
im
ed
R
at
eC
re
di
te
d
Page 95 of 104
ou
rs
C
la
im
or
m
ed
W
or
k
Pe
rf
ls
In
iti
a
D
at
e
Attachment to Mem. Op. [ECF No. 30]
0.250
0.250
450.00
450.00
112.50
112.50
112.50
-
Telephone communication with
client
Intraoffice communication with
C. McAndrews
Review of correspondence from
counsel
0.250
0.250
155.00
116.00
38.75
29.00
29.00
Rate reduced to 75%
USAO
Intraoffice communication with
C. McAndrews and D.C.
McAndrews regarding new
matter
Review of correspondence from
0.500
04/14/16 MEG counsel, A. Finkhousen
0.000
430.00
430.00
215.00
0.00
0.00
Hours reduced (noncompensable)
Intraoffice communication with
C. McAndrews regarding Federal
Court and compensatory
0.125
04/15/16 HBK education
0.125
430.00
430.00
53.75
53.75
53.75
-
04/14/16 AS
0.875
0.875
430.00
430.00
376.25
376.25
376.25
0.250
450.00
450.00
112.50
112.50
112.50
N
ot
-
Review of correspondence from
N. Gregorson regarding use of
compensatory education
Review of Lindamood Bell
04/15/16 DCM report
0.250
es
ar
d
A
w
A
dj
us
te
d
ed
Fe
eC
re
di
te
d
H
Civil Action No. 15‐851 (ESH)
Fe
eC
la
im
ed
H
ou
rs
C
re
di
te
d
R
at
eC
la
im
ed
R
at
eC
re
di
te
d
Pe
k
W
or
Intraoffice communication with
J. Hardy regarding authority
Preparation of Notice
04/15/16 MEG Research regarding procedure
Page 96 of 104
ou
rs
C
la
im
or
m
ed
rf
ls
In
iti
a
D
at
e
Attachment to Mem. Op. [ECF No. 30]
-
Review of emails
Intraoffice communication
regarding case law
Telephone communication with
Judge's chambers
Review of file materials
regarding Notice of Additional
Authority
Preparation of correspondence to
Judge Huvelli
Preparation of Certificate of
Service
Finalize Notice
1.125
Intraoffice communication with
C. McAndrews
0.250
1.125
185.00
131.00
208.13
147.38
147.38
Rate reduced to 85%
USAO
0.000
155.00
116.00
38.75
0.00
0.00
Hours reduced (IEE)
Review of correspondence from
N. Gregorson regarding
compensatory education
Preparation of correspondence to
client regarding same
Review of correspondence from
H. Cohen regarding IEE
Preparation of correspondence to
0.250
04/15/16 CEM H. Cohen regarding same
0.130
275.00
275.00
68.75
35.75
35.75
Hours reduced (IEE)
Intraoffice communication with
C. McAndrews and J. Hardy
regarding status
04/18/16 MEG Review of response
0.375
0.375
430.00
430.00
161.25
161.25
161.25
-
Review of correspondence from
04/18/16 DCM J. Fields regarding compliance 0.125
0.125
450.00
450.00
56.25
56.25
56.25
-
Review of correspondence from
J. Fields regarding compensatory
education
Intraoffice communication with
M. Gehring and J. Hardy
regarding same
Review of correspondence from
0.250
04/18/16 CEM H. Cohen regarding IEE
0.130
275.00
275.00
68.75
35.75
35.75
04/20/16 JH
0.125
185.00
131.00
23.13
16.38
16.38
Hours reduced (IEE)
Rate reduced to 85%
USAO
04/15/16 JH
04/15/16 AS
Review of emails
0.125
N
ot
es
ar
d
A
w
A
dj
us
te
d
ed
Fe
eC
re
di
te
d
H
Review of correspondence from
H. Cohen regarding IEE
Review of independent report
Intraoffice communication with
D.C. McAndrews regarding
04/20/16 CEM same and IEE
1.000
Intraoffice communication with
C. McAndrews regarding Federal
04/21/16 HBK Court
0.125
Review of email to A.
04/21/16 MEG Finkhousen
0.125
Civil Action No. 15‐851 (ESH)
Fe
eC
la
im
ed
H
ou
rs
C
re
di
te
d
R
at
eC
la
im
ed
R
at
eC
re
di
te
d
Page 97 of 104
ou
rs
C
la
im
or
m
ed
W
or
k
Pe
rf
ls
In
iti
a
D
at
e
Attachment to Mem. Op. [ECF No. 30]
0.000
275.00
275.00
275.00
0.00
0.00
Hours reduced (IEE)
0.125
430.00
430.00
53.75
53.75
53.75
-
0.125
430.00
430.00
53.75
53.75
53.75
-
0.125
0.125
185.00
131.00
23.13
16.38
16.38
Rate reduced to 85%
USAO
Preparation of correspondence to
DCPS regarding authorization
for compensatory education
Intraoffice communication with
H.B. Konkler-Goldsmith
regarding Federal Court
Review of correspondence from
A. Anokye regarding
compensatory education
Preparation of correspondences
to counsel, A. Finkhousen,
regarding same
Intraoffice communication with
D.C. McAndrews regarding IEE
Preparation of correspondences
to H. Cohen regarding same
Telephone communication with
counsel regarding compensatory
education
Review of correspondence from
counsel regarding same
Review of correspondence from
1.250
04/21/16 CEM H. Cohen regarding IEE
0.750
275.00
275.00
343.75
206.25
206.25
Hours reduced (IEE)
Review of materials regarding
possible IEE
Review of correspondences from
04/21/16 DCM counsel, A. Finkhousen
0.625
0.000
450.00
450.00
281.25
0.00
0.00
Hours reduced (IEE)
Review of correspondence from
04/22/16 MEG counsel, A. Finkhousen
0.125
0.125
430.00
430.00
53.75
53.75
53.75
-
Review of correspondence from
04/22/16 DCM counsel, A. Finkhousen
0.125
0.125
450.00
450.00
56.25
56.25
56.25
-
04/21/16 JH
Review of emails regarding
compensatory education fund
N
ot
es
ar
d
ed
A
w
A
dj
us
te
d
H
Fe
eC
re
di
te
d
Pe
k
W
or
Civil Action No. 15‐851 (ESH)
Fe
eC
la
im
ed
H
ou
rs
C
re
di
te
d
R
at
eC
la
im
ed
R
at
eC
re
di
te
d
Page 98 of 104
ou
rs
C
la
im
or
m
ed
rf
ls
In
iti
a
D
at
e
Attachment to Mem. Op. [ECF No. 30]
Review of correspondence from
counsel, A. Finkhousen,
regarding compensatory
education
Telephone communication with
H. Cohen regarding IEE
Review of file materials
0.375
04/22/16 CEM regarding same
0.125
275.00
275.00
103.13
34.38
34.38
Hours reduced (IEE)
Review of correspondence from
H. Cohen regarding IEE
Preparation of correspondence to
04/24/16 CEM H. Cohen regarding same
0.125
0.000
275.00
275.00
34.38
0.00
0.00
Hours reduced (IEE)
Review of file
materials/Intraoffice
communication regarding use of
04/25/16 DCM compensatory education
0.250
0.250
450.00
450.00
112.50
112.50
112.50
-
0.375
275.00
275.00
378.13
103.13
103.13
Hours reduced (IEE)
0.000
275.00
275.00
34.38
0.00
0.00
Hours reduced (IEE)
0.125
0.000
430.00
430.00
53.75
0.00
0.00
Hours reduced (IEE)
Review of correspondences from
A. Anokye regarding
compensatory education
Preparation of correspondences
0.500
04/29/16 CEM to A. Anokye regarding same
0.500
275.00
275.00
137.50
137.50
137.50
-
Intraoffice communication with
04/29/16 MEG C. McAndrews regarding status
0.125
0.125
430.00
430.00
53.75
53.75
53.75
-
Review of School District's
compensatory education plan
Review of correspondence from
04/29/16 DCM counsel, A. Anokye
0.250
0.250
450.00
450.00
112.50
112.50
112.50
04/29/16 JH
0.125
0.125
185.00
131.00
23.13
16.38
16.38
Rate reduced to 85%
USAO
Review of correspondence from
N. Gregorson regarding tutoring
Preparation of correspondence to
05/02/16 CEM N. Gregorson regarding same
0.125
0.125
275.00
275.00
34.38
34.38
34.38
-
Review of file materials
regarding IEE
Review of DCPS Court materials
Telephone communication with
H. Cohen regarding IEE
Intraoffice communication with
D.C. McAndrews regarding
1.375
04/25/16 CEM same
Intraoffice communication with
H.B. Konkler-Goldsmith
04/26/16 CEM regarding IEE
0.125
Intraoffice communication with
04/26/16 HBK C. McAndrews regarding IEE
Review of emails
N
ot
es
ar
d
ed
A
w
A
dj
us
te
d
H
Fe
eC
re
di
te
d
Pe
k
W
or
Civil Action No. 15‐851 (ESH)
Fe
eC
la
im
ed
H
ou
rs
C
re
di
te
d
R
at
eC
la
im
ed
R
at
eC
re
di
te
d
Page 99 of 104
ou
rs
C
la
im
or
m
ed
rf
ls
In
iti
a
D
at
e
Attachment to Mem. Op. [ECF No. 30]
Preparation of correspondences
to A. Anokye regarding
compensatory education
Review of correspondence from
A. Anokye regarding same
Intraoffice communication with
H.B. Konkler-Goldsmith
regarding Federal matter
Intraoffice communication with
M. Gehring regarding same and
compensatory education
Review of correspondence from
counsel, A. Finkhousen,
0.750
05/03/16 CEM regarding Motion
0.750
275.00
275.00
206.25
206.25
206.25
-
Review of correspondence from
A. Anokye
Intraoffice communication with
05/03/16 MEG C. McAndrews regarding status 0.375
0.375
430.00
430.00
161.25
161.25
161.25
-
Review of correspondences from
N. Gregerson regarding
compliance with compensatory
education award and
compensatory education
supplementation
Review of correspondence
regarding implementation issues
Review of correspondences from
counsel, A. Anokye enclosing
0.625
05/03/16 DCM Authorization
0.630
450.00
450.00
281.25
283.50
283.50
05/03/16 JH
0.125
0.125
185.00
131.00
23.13
16.38
16.38
Rate reduced to 85%
USAO
Intraoffice communication with
D.C. McAndrews and M.
Gehring regarding compensatory
education
Preparation of correspondence to
0.250
05/04/16 CEM N. Gregorson regarding same
0.250
275.00
275.00
68.75
68.75
68.75
-
Review of correspondence from
counsel, A. Finkhousen
Intraoffice communication with
C. McAndrews and D.C.
McAndrews regarding status
Preparation of correspondence to
0.500
05/04/16 MEG counsel
0.500
430.00
430.00
215.00
215.00
215.00
-
Review of emails
N
ot
es
ar
d
ed
A
w
A
dj
us
te
d
H
Fe
eC
re
di
te
d
Pe
k
W
or
Civil Action No. 15‐851 (ESH)
Fe
eC
la
im
ed
H
ou
rs
C
re
di
te
d
R
at
eC
la
im
ed
R
at
eC
re
di
te
d
Page 100 of 104
ou
rs
C
la
im
or
m
ed
rf
ls
In
iti
a
D
at
e
Attachment to Mem. Op. [ECF No. 30]
Review of correspondence from
counsel, A. Finkhousen
Review of correspondence from
N. Gregorson regarding
05/04/16 DCM compensatory education
0.375
0.375
450.00
450.00
168.75
168.75
168.75
05/04/16 JH
0.125
0.125
185.00
131.00
23.13
16.38
16.38
Rate reduced to 85%
USAO
Intraoffice communication with
A. Sauer regarding
compensatory education
Review of correspondences from
N. Gregorson regarding same
Preparation of correspondence to
N. Gregorson regarding
compensatory education
Intraoffice communication with
M. Gehring and D.C.
McAndrews regarding
0.500
05/05/16 CEM Stipulation
0.500
275.00
275.00
137.50
137.50
137.50
-
Intraoffice communication with
D.C. McAndrews regarding
Stipulation
Review of Stipulation
Preparation of correspondence to
counsel, A. Finkhousen
Review of correspondence from
0.500
05/05/16 MEG counsel
0.500
430.00
430.00
215.00
215.00
215.00
-
Review of correspondence from
counsel
Review of file materials
Intraoffice communication with
C. McAndrews
Telephone communication with
client
0.125
0.125
155.00
116.00
19.38
14.50
14.50
0.125
0.125
0.125
0.125
185.00
430.00
131.00
430.00
23.13
53.75
16.38
53.75
16.38
53.75
Rate reduced to 75%
USAO
Rate reduced to 85%
USAO
-
0.125
0.125
155.00
116.00
19.38
14.50
14.50
Rate reduced to 75%
USAO
Intraoffice communication with
A. Sauer regarding
compensatory education and
summer program
Telephone communication with
client regarding same
Research regarding summer
program
Telephone communication with
H. Cohen regarding IEE
Preparation of correspondence to
2.375
05/09/16 CEM H. Cohen regarding same
0.000
275.00
275.00
653.13
0.00
0.00
Hours reduced (IEE)
05/05/16 AS
Review of emails
05/05/16 JH
Review of emails
05/06/16 MEG Update case status
05/06/16 AS
Telephone communication with
client
Intraoffice communication with
C. McAndrews
Telephone communication with
client
Intraoffice communication with
05/10/16 AS
C. McAndrews
Intraoffice communication with
A. Sauer regarding
05/11/16 CEM transportation
N
ot
es
ar
d
A
w
A
dj
us
te
d
ed
Fe
eC
re
di
te
d
H
Civil Action No. 15‐851 (ESH)
Fe
eC
la
im
ed
H
ou
rs
C
re
di
te
d
R
at
eC
la
im
ed
R
at
eC
re
di
te
d
Pe
k
W
or
Intraoffice communication with
A. Sauer regarding
05/10/16 CEM compensatory education
Page 101 of 104
ou
rs
C
la
im
or
m
ed
rf
ls
In
iti
a
D
at
e
Attachment to Mem. Op. [ECF No. 30]
0.250
0.250
275.00
275.00
68.75
68.75
68.75
-
0.125
0.000
155.00
116.00
19.38
0.00
0.00
Hours reduced (IEE)
0.125
0.125
275.00
275.00
34.38
34.38
34.38
-
05/11/16 AS
Telephone communication with
client
Intraoffice communication with
C. McAndrews
0.125
0.125
155.00
116.00
19.38
14.50
14.50
Rate reduced to 75%
USAO
05/12/16 AS
Telephone communication with
client
Intraoffice communication with
C. McAndrews
0.125
0.125
155.00
116.00
19.38
14.50
14.50
Rate reduced to 75%
USAO
Intraoffice communication with
05/16/16 CEM L. O'Connell regarding transfer
0.375
0.375
275.00
275.00
103.13
103.13
103.13
05/17/16 JH
0.125
0.125
185.00
131.00
23.13
16.38
16.38
Rate reduced to 85%
USAO
Review of file materials
regarding IEE and Federal Court
appeal
Intraoffice communication with
A. Sauer regarding
compensatory education
Preparation of correspondence to
J. Fields regarding IEE Request
Review of correspondence from
J. Fields regarding same
Intraoffice communication
regarding transfer
Review of correspondence from
1.625
05/17/16 CEM colleague regarding IEE
0.250
275.00
275.00
446.88
68.75
68.75
Hours reduced (IEE)
Intraoffice communication with
C. McAndrews regarding status
05/17/16 MEG Review of IEE Request
0.250
0.000
430.00
430.00
107.50
0.00
0.00
Hours reduced (IEE)
Review of materials from school
psychologist
Review of file
materials/Intraoffice
communication regarding IEE
05/17/16 DCM Request and compliance issues 0.375
0.125
450.00
450.00
168.75
56.25
56.25
Hours reduced (IEE)
Intraoffice communication with
A. Butler regarding Release
Intraoffice communication with
05/18/16 MEG C. McAndrews regarding status
0.250
430.00
430.00
107.50
107.50
107.50
-
Review of emails
0.250
0.250
155.00
116.00
38.75
29.00
29.00
05/18/16 JH
Review of emails
N
ot
es
ar
d
A
w
ed
05/18/16 AS
Intraoffice communication with
D.C. McAndrews and J. Hardy
Preparation of correspondence to
counsel
0.250
A
dj
us
te
d
H
Fe
eC
re
di
te
d
Pe
k
W
or
Civil Action No. 15‐851 (ESH)
Fe
eC
la
im
ed
H
ou
rs
C
re
di
te
d
R
at
eC
la
im
ed
R
at
eC
re
di
te
d
Page 102 of 104
ou
rs
C
la
im
or
m
ed
rf
ls
In
iti
a
D
at
e
Attachment to Mem. Op. [ECF No. 30]
0.125
0.125
185.00
131.00
23.13
16.38
16.38
Rate reduced to 75%
USAO
Rate reduced to 85%
USAO
Intraoffice communication with
D.C. McAndrews, A. Sauer and
M. Gehring regarding IEE
05/18/16 CEM Request
0.125
0.000
275.00
275.00
34.38
0.00
0.00
Hours reduced (IEE)
Review of file
materials/Intraoffice
communication regarding IEE
Request
Research recent cases regarding
statute of limitations and
05/18/16 DCM compensatory education
0.625
0.250
450.00
450.00
281.25
112.50
112.50
Hours reduced (IEE)
05/19/16 AS
Intraoffice communication with
D.C. McAndrews and J. Hardy
Preparation of correspondence to
client
0.250
0.250
155.00
116.00
38.75
29.00
29.00
05/19/16 JH
Review of emails
0.250
185.00
131.00
46.25
32.75
32.75
Rate reduced to 75%
USAO
Rate reduced to 85%
USAO
0.250
Review of correspondence from
05/19/16 CEM J. Fields regarding IEE Request 0.125
Update case status
Review of correspondence from
0.375
05/19/16 MEG J. Fields
0.000
275.00
275.00
34.38
0.00
0.00
Hours reduced (IEE)
0.125
430.00
430.00
161.25
53.75
53.75
Hours reduced (IEE)
Intraoffice communication with
D.C. McAndrews, M. Gehring
05/23/16 CEM and J. Hardy regarding Decision 0.125
0.125
275.00
275.00
34.38
34.38
34.38
-
Intraoffice communication with
A. Sauer regarding status
Intraoffice communication with
D.C. McAndrews, C.
McAndrews, M. Connolly and
H.B. Konkler-Goldsmith
regarding Decision
05/23/16 MEG Review of Decision
Review Opinion and Order of
05/23/16 DCM Court
0.500
0.500
430.00
430.00
215.00
215.00
215.00
-
0.500
0.500
450.00
450.00
225.00
225.00
225.00
-
Telephone communication with
client
Intraoffice communication with
D.C. McAndrews, J. Hardy and
M. Gehring
0.125
0.125
155.00
116.00
19.38
14.50
14.50
Rate reduced to 75%
USAO
Intraoffice communication with
D.C. McAndrews, M. Gehring
05/24/16 CEM and J. Hardy regarding Decision 0.125
0.000
275.00
275.00
34.38
0.00
0.00
No fee awarded (Postjudgment)
05/23/16 AS
N
ot
es
ar
d
ed
A
w
A
dj
us
te
d
H
Fe
eC
re
di
te
d
Pe
k
W
or
Civil Action No. 15‐851 (ESH)
Fe
eC
la
im
ed
H
ou
rs
C
re
di
te
d
R
at
eC
la
im
ed
R
at
eC
re
di
te
d
Page 103 of 104
ou
rs
C
la
im
or
m
ed
rf
ls
In
iti
a
D
at
e
Attachment to Mem. Op. [ECF No. 30]
Intraoffice communication with
D.C. McAndrews, H.B. KonklerGoldsmith, M. Connolly, C.
McAndrews and J. Hardy
regarding status and Fee Petition
Research regarding Fee Petition
Intraoffice communication with
C. McAndrews regarding
Decision
Intraoffice communication with
1.375
05/24/16 MEG T. Baker regarding invoice
0.000
430.00
430.00
591.25
0.00
0.00
No fee awarded (Postjudgment)
Review of file
materials/Intraoffice
communication regarding
05/24/16 DCM compliance and remand issues
0.125
0.000
450.00
450.00
56.25
0.00
0.00
No fee awarded (Postjudgment)
05/24/16 AS
Intraoffice communication with
D.C. McAndrews, J. Hardy, M.
Gehring, M. Connolly and H.B.
Konkler-Goldsmith
0.125
0.000
155.00
116.00
19.38
0.00
0.00
05/24/16 JH
Review of emails
0.125
0.000
185.00
131.00
23.13
0.00
0.00
05/25/16 MEG Research regarding Fee Petition 0.375
Review of correspondence from
05/25/16 DCM J. Fields regarding IEE
0.125
0.000
430.00
430.00
161.25
0.00
0.00
0.000
450.00
450.00
56.25
0.00
0.00
0.250
0.000
155.00
116.00
38.75
0.00
0.00
0.125
0.000
155.00
116.00
19.38
0.00
0.00
No fee awarded (Postjudgment)
No fee awarded (Postjudgment)
05/25/16 AS
05/26/16 AS
Intraoffice communication with
D.C. McAndrews and J. Hardy
Intraoffice communication with
A. Butler
No fee awarded (Postjudgment)
No fee awarded (Postjudgment)
No fee awarded (Postjudgment)
No fee awarded (Postjudgment)
Intraoffice communication with
D.C. McAndrews and A. Sauer
regarding compensatory
05/27/16 CEM education
Intraoffice communication with
C. McAndrews and A. Sauer
05/27/16 MEG regarding status
0.125
0.000
275.00
275.00
34.38
0.00
0.00
No fee awarded (Postjudgment)
0.375
0.000
430.00
430.00
161.25
0.00
0.00
No fee awarded (Postjudgment)
05/27/16 AS
Telephone communication with
client
Intraoffice communication with
D.C. McAndrews, J. Hardy, M.
Gehring, A. Hagan and H.B.
Konkler-Goldsmith
0.250
0.000
155.00
116.00
38.75
0.00
0.00
05/28/16 JH
Review of emails
0.125
0.000
185.00
131.00
23.13
0.00
0.00
No fee awarded (Postjudgment)
No fee awarded (Postjudgment)
N
ot
es
ar
d
A
w
A
dj
us
te
d
ed
Fe
eC
re
di
te
d
H
Fe
eC
la
im
ed
H
ou
rs
C
re
di
te
d
R
at
eC
la
im
ed
R
at
eC
re
di
te
d
Pe
k
W
or
Research regarding attorneys'
fees
Preparation of Motion for
Attorneys' Fees
Intraoffice communication with
C. McAndrews regarding status
Intraoffice communication with
05/31/16 MEG A. Butler regarding Motion
Civil Action No. 15‐851 (ESH)
ou
rs
C
la
im
or
m
ed
Page 104 of 104
rf
ls
In
iti
a
D
at
e
Attachment to Mem. Op. [ECF No. 30]
2.250
0.000
430.00
430.00
967.50
0.00
0.00
No fee awarded (Postjudgment)
Preparation of email to J. Fields
Review of emails
0.250
0.000
185.00
131.00
46.25
0.00
0.00
No fee awarded (Postjudgment)
Review of correspondence to
counsel, A. Finkhousen
Preparation of Fee Petition
papers
Intraoffice communication with
T. Baker regarding invoice
Review of emails between client
7.500
06/02/16 MEG and Case Manager
0.000
430.00
430.00
3,225.00
0.00
0.00
No fee awarded (Postjudgment)
Intraoffice communication with
M. Connolly regarding Motion
Preparation of correspondence to
counsel, A. Finkhousen
Review of correspondence from
counsel
Intraoffice communication with
D.C. McAndrews and H.B.
Konkler-Goldsmith regarding
status and invoice
Review of correspondence from
A. Allen-King
Intraoffice communication with
T. Baker regarding invoice
Preparation of Fee Petition
papers
7.875
06/03/16 MEG Research regarding Rules
0.000
430.00
430.00
3,386.25
0.00
0.00
No fee awarded (Postjudgment)
06/01/16 JH
Total
Total
Hours
Hours
Claimed Credited
TOTALS
Total Hours
* Rate
Claimed
Total Hours
* Rate
Credited
Total Fees
(before
reductions)
Fee Awarded after
15% reduction for
complexity and 5%
reduction for block
billing
618.000 503.700
212081.51
168473.03
161903.98
$129,523.18
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?