1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 9 SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA 10 11 LAURA RUSSELL, Case No.: 23-CV-20-WVG

12 Plaintiff, ORDER GRANTING JOINT 13 v. MOTION FOR AWARD AND PAYMENT OF ATTORNEYS FEES 14 KILOLO KIJAKAZI, Acting AND EXPENSES PURSUANT TO Commissioner of Social Security, 15 THE EQUAL ACCESS TO JUSTICE Defendant. ACT, 28 U.S.C. SECTION 2412(D) 16

17 18 Before the Court is the Parties’ Joint Motion for the Award and Payment of Attorney 19 Fees and Expenses Pursuant to the Equal Access to Justice Act,

(d) 20 (“Joint Motion”). (Doc. No. 15.) 21 Under the Equal Access to Justice Act (“EAJA”), a prevailing party may seek 22 attorney’s fees from the Commissioner of Social Security within 30 days of the entry of 23 final judgment. See

(d). “A plaintiff who obtains a sentence four remand 24 is considered a prevailing party for purposes of attorneys’ fees.” Akopyan v. Barnhart, 296

(9th Cir. 2002). “A sentence four remand becomes a final judgment, for 26 purposes of attorneys’ fees claims brought pursuant to the EAJA,

(d), 27 upon expiration of the time for appeal.”

Federal Rule of Appellate Procedure 4(a)(1)(B) 28 sets a 60-day deadline to file an appeal in cases where the United States is a party. Fed. R. 1 || App. P. 4(a)(1)@B). 2 The amount of fees awarded are based upon prevailing market rates for the kind and 3 || quality of the services provided.

(d)(2)(A). The hourly rate may not 4 exceed $125 per hour “unless the court determines that an increase in the cost of living or 5 ||a special factor, such as the limited availability of qualified attorneys for the proceedings 6 involved, justifies a higher fee.”

(d)(2)(A)(i1). The Ninth Circuit’s 2022 7 || statutory maximum hourly rate under the EAJA, adjusted for increases in the cost of living, 8 ||was $234.95. “Statutory Maximum Rates Under the Equal Access to Justice Act,” 9 || https://www.ca9.uscourts.gov/attorneys/statutory-maximum-rates/ (last accessed June 15, 10 || 2022) (citing

(d)(2)(A); Thangaraja v. Gonzales,

, 876-77 11 (9th Cir. 2005); Ninth Circuit Rule 39-1.6). 12 Here, judgment was entered in favor of Plaintiff on March 17, 2023 pursuant to 13 sentence four of

(g). (Doc. No. 14.) Because the time to file an appeal 14 |/has since expired, there is a final judgment and the Motion is timely filed. Hoa 15 || Hong Van v. Barnhart,

(9th Cir. 2007) (“a successful disability applicant 16 ||may file for attorneys’ fees 30 days after the 60-day appeal period provided for in Rule 17 || 4(a) has run, regardless of the specific form of the court's judgment, or the particular nature 18 ||of the government's non-opposition to or acquiescence in an award of benefits.”). As 19 |/Plaintiffs counsel performed 3.1 hours of work □□ □ this case, which 20 performed in 2023 under the hourly rate of $234.95, the Court finds the 21 requested fee award is reasonable and fair. 22 Accordingly, the Court GRANTS the Joint Motion and awards to Plaintiff attorney’s 23 || fees in the amount of $728.34 and costs in the amount of $0.00, subject to the terms of the 24 || Joint Motion, including, but not limited to, any offset as determined by the Government. 25 IT IS SO ORDERED. 26 || DATED: June 15, 2023 Ss 7 Hon. William V. Gallo 3 United States Magistrate Judge