Opinion
2:22-cv-00402-HZ
06-20-2023
CHAD HATFIELD Attorney at Law Hatfield Law Office Attorney for Plaintiff
CHAD HATFIELD Attorney at Law Hatfield Law Office Attorney for Plaintiff
ORDER GRANTING PLAINTIFF'S PETITION FOR EAJA FEES
MARCO A. HERNANDEZ UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE
BEFORE THE COURT is Plaintiff's motion for an award of attorney fees pursuant to the Equal Access to Justice Act (EAJA), 28 U.S.C. § 2412. (Ct. Rec. 20.) Attorney CHAD HATFIELD represents Plaintiff. United States Attorney for the District of Oregon Natalie Wight, Civil Division Chief Kevin Danielson, and Special Assistant United States Attorney Erin Highland represent the Defendant. Defendant does not oppose Plaintiff's Motion.
On March 7, 2023, this Court issued an Opinion and Order reversing the Commissioner's decision and remanding for further proceedings, and a Judgment reflecting the same. (Ct. Rec. 18/19). Plaintiff now moves for an award of attorney fees pursuant to EAJA. (Ct. Rec. 20.)
The EAJA provides for an award of attorney fees to private litigants who both prevail in civil actions (other than tort) against the United States and timely file a petition for fees. 28 U.S.C. § 2412(d)(2)(A). Under the EAJA, the court shall award attorney fees to the prevailing party unless it finds the government's position was “substantially justified or that special circumstances make such an award unjust.” 28 U.S.C. § 2412(d)(1)(A).
Plaintiff seeks attorney fees of $7,541.90 based on an attorney fee rate of $234.95 per hour for 30.0 hours in 2022, and $234.95 per hour for 2.1 hours worked in 2023. Accordingly, after review, IT IS ORDERED:
(1) The Plaintiff's Motion (Ct. Rec. 20.) is GRANTED. The Commissioner is directed to pay Plaintiff EAJA fees of $7,541.90.
(2) The award to Plaintiff shall be delivered or otherwise transmitted to Plaintiff's attorney of record. Address for the attorney for the Plaintiff:
Chad Hatfield 8131 W Klamath Ct, Ste D Kennewick, WA 99336
(3) EAJA fees, expenses, and costs are subject to any offsets allowed under the Treasury Offset Program (TOP), as discussed in Astrue v. Ratliff__, U.S.__(2010), 130 S.Ct. 2521, 2522 (2010). No costs or expenses are awarded.
IT IS SO ORDERED.