EAJA Awards

Agency Agency subcomponent Name Award date Award amount Awardees Claims description Finding basis Actions
U.S. Department of State Federal Bureau of Investigation (FBI), Department of Homeland Se... Ibrahim v. DHS, et al. (N.D. Cal.)
$ 220,470
Dr. Rahinah Ibrahim (represented by McManis Faulkner) Dr. Ibrahim claimed a violation of her due process rights by being put on the No Fly list. The District Court found that Dr. Ibrahim was incorrectly put on the No Fly list for a brief period of time due to a clerical error. Show
U.S. Department of Justice Executive Office of Immigration Review (EOIR) Banda v. Neilsen et al.
$ 8,437
Northwest Immigrant Rights Project Immigration habeas petition challenging prolonged detention without bond hearing Settlement agreement Show
U.S. Department of Justice Executive Office of Immigration Review (EOIR) Martin v. Barr
$ 2,108
Michael Martin, Legal Aid Society Whether the Board of Immigration Appeals committed legal error when it dismissed Mr. Martin’s appeal pursuant to 8 C.F.R. § 1003.23(b)(1). Settlement agreement Show
U.S. Department of Justice Executive Office of Immigration Review (EOIR) Vasquez Cruz v. Barr et al.
$ 4,150
Ricardo Vasquez Cruz Immigration habeas petition challenging detention without bond hearing Settlement agreement Show
U.S. Department of Justice Executive Office of Immigration Review (EOIR) Sotelo Tarin v. Bonnar
$ 30,250
Pangea Legal Services Immigration habeas petition challenging Board of Immigration Appeals bond decision and re-arrest Settlement agreement Show
U.S. Department of Justice Executive Office of Immigration Review (EOIR) Ady Masood v. Barr
$ 3,750
Pangea Legal Services Immigration habeas petition challenging detention without bond hearing Settlement agreement Show
U.S. Department of Justice Executive Office of Immigration Review (EOIR) Raul Lopez Reyes v. Bonnar
$ 17,500
Dolores Street Community Services Immigration habeas petition challenging detention without bond hearing Settlement agreement Show
U.S. Department of Justice Executive Office of Immigration Review (EOIR) Leon Alfaro v. Barr
$ 3,500
Central American Resource Center of Northern California Immigration habeas petition challenging detention without bond hearing Settlement agreement Show
U.S. Department of Justice Executive Office of Immigration Review (EOIR) Garcia Gonzalez v. Bonnar
$ 4,500
Asian Americans Advancing Justice-Asian Law Caucus Immigration habeas petition challenging prolonged detention without bond hearing Settlement agreement Show
U.S. Department of Justice Bureau of Prisons (BOP) Rodriguez-Castillo v. Nielsen, et al.
$ 190,718
Gustavo Rodriquez Castillo, Gabriela M. Lopez, Immigrant Defenders Law Center This case challenged the detention of immigration detainees at the Federal Correctional Institution at Victorville, California. Plaintiffs claimed a denial of attorney access violated their due process and First Amendment rights, and that Defendants’ policies regarding access to attorneys violated the Administrative Procedure Act and the Immigration and Nationality Act. The court ruled that the Defendants’ assertion that confining detainees at a facility for convicted criminals complicated access to counsel does not justify Defendants’ position. Show
U.S. Department of Justice Null United States v. 269 Acres, More or Less, Located in Beaufort County, South Carolina
$ 84,757
William D. Trask, Jr. The United States filed this case in 2016 to impose a permanent restrictive easement over 269.22 acres of land located in Beaufort, South Carolina, which the landowners had owned in fee simple since 1955. The easement restricts land development in the flight path of jets in and out of the adjacent U.S. Marine Corps Air Station. The court found that the government’s pre-litigation actions and litigation positions were not substantially justified because it had taken three different stances on valuation for determination of just compensation for the property. Show
U.S. Department of Justice Federal Bureau of Investigation (FBI) Abdisalam Wilwal, et al. v. Elaine Duke, et al.
$ 55,000
Abdisalam Wilwal, Sagal Abidgani Claims that are the subject of the settlement were: violations of the Fourth Amendment (unconstitutional seizure and excessive force), Fifth Amendment (violations of procedural due process and substantive due process), and the Administrative Procedure Act. Settlement agreement Show
Other Agency Social Security Administration (SSA) [Redacted] v Commissioner of Social Security
$ 7,200
[Redacted] Action for Judicial Review of the Final Decision of the Commissioner of Social Security under the Social Security Act [Redacted] Show
Other Agency Social Security Administration (SSA) [Redacted] v Commissioner of Social Security
$ 4,673
[Redacted] Action for Judicial Review of the Final Decision of the Commissioner of Social Security under the Social Security Act [Redacted] Show
Other Agency Social Security Administration (SSA) [Redacted] v Commissioner of Social Security
$ 7,300
[Redacted] Action for Judicial Review of the Final Decision of the Commissioner of Social Security under the Social Security Act [Redacted] Show