EAJA Awards

Agency Agency subcomponent Name Award date Award amount Awardees Claims description Finding basis Actions
U.S. Department of Homeland Security U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement REDACTED v. Garland
$ 14,608
REDACTED Petition for Review under 8 U.S.C. § 1252(a)(1). 9th Cir. granted PFR and remanded, hodling that BIA did not make clear that it considered all evidence in its decision. Without discussion, 9th Cir. granted EAJA fees despite prior joint motion w/ language indicating that each party would bear its own costs; USG filed late opposition. Show
U.S. Department of Agriculture Forest Service Klamath Forest Alliance
$ 37,000
Meriel L. Darzen Violated NEPA by unlawful use of inapplicable categorical exclusion and arbitrary conclusion that no extraordinary circumstances are present. Violated NEPA by unlawful use of inapplicable categorical exclusion and arbitrary conclusion that no extraordinary circumstances are present. Show
U.S. Department of Homeland Security USCIS Zizi v. Cuccinelli, et al
$ 48,659
REDACTED Challenge to the denial of an EB-1A visa, alien with extraordinary ability. USCIS settled the case. Plaintiff was the prevailing party whose position was substantially justified. Show
U.S. Department of Homeland Security U.S. Citizenship and Immigration Services Qubadi v. Hackbarth
$ 100,000
David Sturman Mandamus USCIS acted arbitrarily and capriciously in failing to grant Mr. Qubadi’s I-485 application on the basis of providing material support to a Tier III terrorist organization. Show
U.S. Department of Agriculture Forest Service Center for Biological Diversity; and Maricopa Audobn Society
$ 28,000
Marc D. Fink and Brian Segee Failure to reinitiate and complete consultation. Failure to develop and implement a recovery plan for the New Mexico Jumping Mouse. Failure to carry out the FWS' Assistance, Programs for the conservation of the New Mexico Meadow Jumping Mouse. Failure to insure and maintain a viable population of ne New Mexico Meadow jumping Mouse. US Fish and Wildlife Service failed to develop and implement a recovery plan for the New Mexico Jumping Mouse Show
U.S. Department of the Interior Fish and Wildlife Service Center for Biological Diversity Inc. et al v. Bernhardt
$ 40,000
Edwin F. Mandel Legal Aid Clinic, University of Chicago The present dispute centers around Plaintiffs’ petition to the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service to list the lake sturgeon as a threatened or endangered species under 16 U.S.C. §1533. The parties agree that the Service has not complied with 16 U.S.C. §1533(b)(3), which requires the Secretary of the Interior to issue a finding related to an interested person’s petition within 12 months of receiving the petition. U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service failed to meet the statutory deadline for responding to a petition to list the Lake Sturgeon as threatedned or endangered. Show
U.S. Department of the Interior Bureau of Land Management (BLM) Ginger Kathrens and the Cloud Foundation v. Bernhardt
$ 45,000
Meyer, Glitzenstein & Eubanks, LLP Complaint alleging that Federal Defendants violated the Wild Free-Roaming Horses and Burros Act, the Administrative Procedures Act, and the National Environmental Policy Act. TRO granted, BLM enjoined from proceeding. BLM has withdrawn DR. 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
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 Homeland Security U.S. Customs and Border Protection (CBP) Allen v. Barr
$ 67,686
REDACTED Mr. Allen was placed in removal proceedings. He argued he was a United States citizen. The Immigration Judge disagreed and the Board of Immigration Appeals affirmed. The United States Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit held that Mr. Allen was a United States citizen and terminated the removal proceedings against him. Counsel filed a subsequent claim for attorneys' fees and costs pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 2412(b). The United States Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit stated "[t]he position of the Respondent and the agency was not "substantially justified." 28 U.S.C. § 2412(d)(1)(A); see also Comm'r, INS v. Jean, 496 U.S. 154, 158 n.6 (1990); Gomez-Beleno v. Holder, 644 F.3d 139, 144-46 (2d Cir. 2011)." The Court did not further explain their conclusion. Show
U.S. Department of Homeland Security U.S. Customs and Border Protection Singh v. Garland
$ 8,446
REDACTED The United States Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit held the Board of Immigration Appeals failed to consider relevant facts in relation to Mr. Singh's aslyum and withholding of removal claims. Following remand, counsel filed a claim for attorney's fees and costs pursuant to 28 U.S.C. 2412(b). The United States Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit concluded the government's position was not substantially justified. However, the court denied fees in relation to a seperate petition and for fees accrued during remand proceedings before the Executive Office for Immigration Review. Show
U.S. Department of Homeland Security U.S. Customs and Border Protection Alvarado-Herrera v. Garland
$ 12,583
REDACTED The United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit found that the immigration judge's conclusion that violence was not perpetrated with the consent or acquiesce of a public official was not supported by substantial evidence given Mr. Alvarado-Herrara's specific assertions of police complicity with a gang's violent acts. The Ninth Circuit remanded the case. Following remand, counsel filed a claim for attorney's fees and costs pursuant to 28 U.S.C. 2412(b). The United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit awarded fees at the cost-of-living adjusted statutory maximum rates but did not award enhanced fees. Show
U.S. Department of Homeland Security U.S. Customs and Border Protection Perez-Trujilo v. Garland Null
$ 51,339
REDACTED The United States Court of Appeals for the First Circuit held the Board of Immigration Appeals erred in overturning Mr. Perez-Trujilo's adjustment of status. Following remand, counsel filed a claim for attorney's fees and costs pursuant to 28 U.S.C. 2412(b). The United States Court of Appeals for the First Circuit awarded fees but did not explain why. Show