EAJA Awards

Agency Agency subcomponent Name Award date Award amount Awardees Claims description Finding basis Actions
U.S. Department of Defense Defense Information Systems Agency In the Matter of SES GS
$ 57,494
SES (Voucher no. 40805) Attorney's Fees Attorney's fees related to GAO Show
U.S. Department of Defense Defense Information Systems Agency APPEAL OF NETWORK DOCUMENTATION & IMPLEMENTATION, INC.
$ 150,000
Network Documentation & Implementation, Inc. NDI asserted a claim based upon an alleged implied-in-fact contract with the Defense Information Systems Agency (“DISA”) at the Armed Services Board of Contract Appeals (“ASBCA”). Settlement Agreement Show
U.S. Department of Defense Department of the Air Force Appeals of Iqrar Ahmed and Partner Contracting Company
$ 13,538
Iqrar Ahmed and Partner Contracting Company Ltd. Claims for fees and costs associated with appeal before the Armed Services Board of Contract Appeal (ASBCA) (ASBCA Nos. 62494 and 62495) challenging a termination for cause and requesting an extension of time to deliver. ASBCA judge found based on the record submitted before the Board that the contract gave appellant 60 work days to deliver and that the government had no basis to terminate appellant for its failure to deliver latrine trailers to Prince Sultan Air Base by 60 calendar days from contract award. Consequently, the Board sustained the appeal and converted the termination for cause to a termination for convenience. ASBCA 62495 challenging the contracting officer's denial of a request for extension of time, was denied as moot. Show
U.S. Department of Defense Department of the Navy Alderman Bldg Co., Inc. v Navy
$ 57,676
Alderman Bldg. Co. Attorney Fees & Costs Prevailing and Eligible Party Show
U.S. Department of Defense U.S. Army Lucas Calixto, et al. v. Department of the Army, et al.
$ 550,000
Wanjing Li, Jingquan Qu, Xiongzhou Zhang, Xi Zhang, Chenhao Qian, Sansiri Suangchomphan, Lei Liu, Wen Si, Yunzheng He, Wendapagnagde Yabre, Sen Li, Fang Lu, Anton Tate, Yue Yin, Sai Krishna Uppugandla, Zehua Bian, Hyunsung Kim, Chengping Yuan, Gunay Miriyeva, Sandeep Mahat, and Shengfan Yang Settlement. A case affecting soldiers who enlisted in the U.S. Army (including Selected Reserve of the Ready Reserve/Delayed Training Program (“DTP”) and Regular Army/Delayed Entry Program (“DEP”) Soldiers) through the Military Accessions Vital to the National Interest (“MAVNI”) program. These fees were settled through negotiation. Fees were deemed appropriate because the Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit overturned our initial victory at the Court of Federal Claims and plaintiff received relief as a result of a subsequent evaluation. Show
U.S. Department of Defense U.S. Army Nicholas Harrison, et al., v. Mark Esper, et al.
$ 100,000
Nicholas Harrison, Richard Roe, Victor Voe and the Modern Miitary Association Settlement. Plaintiff challenged his disability rating rendered by a PEB and the Physical Disability Board of Review. These fees were settled through negotiation. Fees were deemed appropriate as relief was granted on remand and in accordance with a prior court's ruling. Show
U.S. Department of Defense U.S. Army Charles J. Hubert, et al. v. United States
$ 17,500
Charles J. Hubert and Jeremy I. Sunkel Settlement. Class action lawsuit challenging the manner in which discharge upgrade decisions were made concerning PTSD and other mental health issues. These fees were settled as part of a negotiated settlement concerning not only fees, but an amicable resolution of multiple matters within the lawsuit. Show
U.S. Department of Defense U.S. Army Lionel Joell v. Secretary of the Army
$ 18,770
Lionell Joell Memorandum -Decision and Order. Plaintiff challenged his involuntary discharge from the Army. The court awarded plaintiff attorney fees & costs for his counsel's efforts in opposing Defendant's motion to remand the case to the ABCMR. Show
U.S. Department of Defense U.S. Army Wayne P. Marta v. Secretary of the Army
$ 22,000
Wayne P. Marta Settlement. Plaintiff challenged the decision of the Army Board for Correction of Military Records decision to deny his request to correct his records to show that he elected to transfer unused educational benefits to his children. These fees were settled through negotiation. Fees were deemed appropriate because the the district court granted plaintiff’s motion for summary judgment and remanded the case back to the ABCMR for further consideration consistent with its opinion. Show
United States Department of Agriculture Forest Service Rocky Mountain Wild; San Louis Valley Ecosystem Council; San Juan Citizens Alliance; Wilderness Workshop
$ 412,500
Matthew Sandler and Travis E. Stills 1) Claims the EIS and NEPA process are based on an unlawfully narrow design of Federal Action with an unreasonably narrow Purpose and Need statement, 2) The range of alternatives considered is unlawfully narrow, 3) The denial of Leavell-McCombs Joint Venture expanded access request was inappropriately excluded from the alternatives, 4) Forest Service failed to involve cooperating agencies, 5) The FEIS fails to identify and analyze the effectiveness of available mitigation measures, 6) Consideration of connected actions is inadequate, 7) The FEIS failed to provide the public and decisionmaker with a hard look at direct, indirect, and cumulative impacts of the action, 8) There was undue influence and proponent control of NEPA process, and 9) There was a failure to conduct unbiased review of objections. On May 19, 2017, the District Court of Colorado ruled that the Forest Service violated NEPA and set aside the Record of Decision authorizing the Land Exchange Order. Show
United States Department of Agriculture Forest Service Yellowstone to Unitas Connection and Alliance for the Wild Rockies
$ 12,500
Rebecca K. Smith 1) Claims the Forest Service failed to take a hard look at potential cumulative effects on sage grouse and sage grouse habitat, and 2) Failed to rigorously explore and objectively evaluate all reasonable alternatives in the EIS. On 7/7/2022, the District of Idaho issued an order staying the Summary Judgment and motion to dismiss deadlines. The Forest Service withdrew the challenged Record of Decision and parties agreed to discuss a stipulated dismissal. Show
Social Security Administration Null In re Gerson Lliran
$ 1,700
Bruce Allen Motion for Contempt for Willful Violation of Stay Settlement Show
Social Security Administration Null In re Deborah Mims, Mims v. SSA
$ 600
Rodney Lewis Caldwell Adversary Complaint for Turnover and Request for Sanctions for Violation of the Automatic Stay Settlement Show
Social Security Administration Null In re David Livesay
$ 965
Anthony Bush Motion to Approve Compromise and/or Settlement Regarding Alleged Stay Violation Settlement Show
Social Security Administration Null Driggs v. Saul
$ 14,285
Nossaman LLP Action brought by survivor of a same-sex couple who was prevented or delayed from marrying by unconstitutional State laws. The case challenged the application of the 9-month duration of marriage requirement for purposes of determining entitlement to wife's or husband's benefits under Title II of the Social Security Act to these individuals. Settlement Agreement Show