United States District Court for the Southern District of California, 2024

Kortcamp v. Kijakazi

Kortcamp v. Kijakazi
United States District Court for the Southern District of California · Decided May 15, 2024
Kortcamp v. Kijakazi

Trial Court Opinion

8 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 9 SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA GINA K.1, Case No.: 22cv1484-LR 12 Plaintiff, ORDER REQUIRING v. SUPPLEMENTAL BRIEFING ON JOINT MOTION FOR AWARD OF MARTIN O’MALLEY, Commissioner of ATTORNEY FEES AND Social Security, 15 EXPENSES Defendant. [ECF No. 19] 20 Presently before the Court is a “Joint Motion for the Award and Payment of Attorney Fees and Expenses Pursuant to the Equal Access to Justice Act, 28 U.S.C. § 22 2412(d) and Costs Pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1920.” (ECF No. 19.) The parties jointly move the Court to award Plaintiff Gina K. attorney fees and expenses pursuant to the Equal Access to Justice Act (“EAJA”). (See id.) 25 Under the EAJA, a litigant is entitled to attorney fees and costs if: “(1) he is the Pursuant to Civil Local Rule 7.1(e)(6)(b), “[o]pinions by the Court in [Social Security cases under 42 || prevailing party; (2) the government fails to show that its position was substantially justified or that special circumstances make an award unjust; and (3) the requested fees || and costs are reasonable.” Carbonell v. I.N.S., 429 F.3d 894, 898 (9th Cir. 2005). In || assessing the third factor of whether the requested fees are reasonable, the Court looks to || whether the hourly rates and number of hours billed are reasonable. See, e.g., Beatriz B.

6 || v. Saul, Case No.: 3:19-cv-785-AHG, 2020 WL 5203371, at *2-3 (S.D. Cal. Sept. 1, 2020) (noting that attorney fees are awarded based on prevailing market rates for the kind || and quality of the services provided).

9 The parties here have not included a billing statement with their joint motion, or |} any information regarding the number of hours billed, and at what rates. Because this ||information is needed to assess the reasonableness of the requested fees, the Court |} ORDERS the parties to submit a joint supplemental brief to include the names, || qualifications, experience, and hourly billing rates of all attorneys and paralegals who || worked on this case on Plaintiff's behalf. The parties shall also attach Plaintiff's billing || statement as an exhibit, which should include dates, time spent, attorney or paralegal || designation, descriptions of actions, and totals. The joint supplemental brief shall be 17 submitted no later than May 29, 2024.

18 IT IS SO ORDERED.

19 Dated: May 15, 2024 21 / LZ 22 Honorable Lupe Rodriguez, Jr. 73 United States Magistrate Judge

Case-law data current through December 31, 2025. Source: CourtListener bulk data.