EAJA Awards

Agency Agency subcomponent Name Award date Award amount Awardees Claims description Finding basis Actions
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 BLM has withdrawn DR.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 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 the Interior Bureau of Land Management (BLM) Dine Citizens Against Ruining the Environment v. Bernhardt
$ 791,710
Kyle Tisdel Plaintiffs alleged violations of the National Environmental Policy Act (“NEPA”), 42 U.S. C. §§ 4321 et seq., and its implementing regulations, made reviewable pursuant to the Administrative Procedure Act (“APA”), 5 U.S.C. §701 et seq. Plaintiffs filed a motion for preliminary injunction on May 11, 2015. The Tenth Circuit vacated certain oil and gas drilling decisions of the BLM for failure to comply with NEPA. Show
U.S. Department of the Interior Fish and Wildlife Service (FWS) Center for Biological Diversity v. Bernhardt et al., Case. No. 1:19-cv-01607-KBJ
$ 8,500
Collette Adkins CBD filed suit alleging that FWS had failed to designate critical habitat for the salamanders in violation of Section 4 of the Endangered Species Act (ESA). The Service missed the deadlines for designating critical habitat. Plaintiffs entitled to attorneys' fees and costs pursuant to the "catalyst theory." Show
U.S. Department of the Interior Fish and Wildlife Service (FWS) Center for Biological Diversity v. Bernhardt (D. Ariz. No. CV-4:19-218-TUC-RCC
$ 5,100
Brian Segee On April 15, 2019, Plaintiffs filed a complaint alleging the FWS missed the statutory timeframe to issue a 90-day finding. On September 6, 2019, FWS published the 90-day finding. On September 19, 2019, Plaintiffs voluntarily dismissed their complaint. The Service failed to meet a statutory deadline. Plaintiffs entitled to fees and costs pursuant to the "catalyst theory." Show
U.S. Department of the Interior Fish and Wildlife Service (FWS) Red Wolf Coalition, et al. v. FWS
$ 620,000
Southern Environmental Law Center Plaintiffs filed a complaint in this matter alleging the Service violated the Endangered Species Act (“ESA”) and the National Environmental Policy Act (“NEPA”) in connection with its management of the nonessential experimental population of red wolves in eastern North Carolina. The Judge granted Plaintiffs' MSJ finding that the FWS violated sections 4, 7 and 9 of the ESA as regarded its Red Wolf Non-Essential Experimental Population 10(j) rule. Show
U.S. Department of Health and Human Services OGC/R01 Lewis, Carol v. Burwell, C.A. No. 1:15-cv-13530-NMG (D. Mass.)
$ 49,477
Debra Parrish Law Offices (Ms. Lewis assigned her right to payment to her attorney) Plaintiff appealed the denial of coverage for a CGM. The Judge found that the Secretary’s position in the litigation was not substantially justified because 55 ALJs had previously determined that continuous glucose monitors (“CGMs”) were covered by Medicare and no professional in the healthcare industry was of the opinion that CGMs were not primarily and customarily used for medical purposes, amongst other reasons. The Memorandum and Order is in the Documents section of the TRACS matter. Show
U.S. Department of the Interior Bureau of Land Management (BLM) Native Ecosystems Coucil v. BLM
$ 70,000
Thomas Woodbury This matter involves four separate Environmental Assessments with Findings of No Significant Impact (EA/FONSI), as well as four separate decisions (Decision, or collectively the Challenged Decisions) completed by the BLM Dillon Field Office in connection with 4 watersheds. All of the Challenged Decisions provided for vegetation treatments targeting reduction of conifer encroachment in various areas within each watershed. Plaintiff filed an action in the District of Montana, seeking in part to have the BLM enjoined from conducting any activities in connection with the Challenged Decisions. The Plaintiff asserted that the BLM violated NEPA and FLPMA. The judge entered an order granting partial summary judgment in favor of BLM on all claims except one FLPMA claim in connection with a single watershed. The court determined that the BLM failed to supplement one EA to incorporate additional analysis as required by the applicable ARMPA for sage grouse. Show
Other Agency Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) Anacostia Riverkeeper, et. al. v. Wheeler
$ 39,500
Anacostia Riverkeeper, Inc., Kingman Park Civic Association, and Potomac Riverkeeper Network Plaintiffs alleged that the EPA's approval of the District of Columbia's Total Maximum Daily Loads (TMDLs) for bacteria violated the Clean Water Act and the Administrative Procedures Act. The district court vacated EPA’s approval of the TMDLs and stayed the vacatur for one year. Settlement Agreement for EAJA fees. Show
Other Agency Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) Pineros y Campesinos Unidos del Noroeste, et. al. v. Pruitt
$ 236,363
Earthjustice and Farmworker Justice Plaintiffs alleged that EPA rules delaying the effective date of the pesticide certified applicator rule violated the APA and FIFRA. The district court held that in delaying the effective date of the applicator rule, EPA engaged in substantive rulemaking and was required to comply with the APA, but did not do so. Show
Other Agency Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) South Carolina Coastal Conservation League v. Pruitt
$ 105,000
South Carolina Coastal Conservation League, Charleston Waterkeeper, American Rivers, Chattahoochee Riverkeeper, Clean Water Action, Defenders of Wildlife, Friends of the Rappahannock, North Carolina Coastal Federation, and North Carolina Wildlife Federation Plaintiffs alleged that the Final Rule, Definition of "Waters of the U.S."-Addition of an Applicability Date to 2015 Clean Water Rule, 83 Fed. Reg. 5,200 (Feb. 6, 2018), was unlawful and arbitrary under the APA. The district court granted the plaintiffs' motion for summary judgment and vacated and enjoined the rule nationwide, holding that the agency had failed to meet the requirements of the APA. Show
U.S. Department of Homeland Security U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE) REDACTED v. Barr
$ 66,201
REDACTED Habeas The district court found that the government's actions were not substantially justified where the plaintiff was removed without 14-day notice to class counsel in a separate case that required 14-day notice to class counsel prior to the removal of class members, including plaintiff at the time. Show
U.S. Department of Homeland Security U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE) REDACTED v. Wolf
$ 23,923
REDACTED Habeas The district court found that the government's actions were not substantially justified where the plaintiff was removed while he had a motion to reopen pending, though no stay of removal, and his counsel discovered his removal while the plaintiff was already on an airplane for removal. Show
U.S. Department of Justice Executive Office for Immigration Review (DOJ EOIR); Department o... Kharis v. Sessions
$ 10,000
Alexey Kharis Immigration habeas corpus petition challenging petitioner’s detention without a bond hearing. The district court found that the government committed a due process violation, and the Ninth Circuit has held that a denial of due process rights “precludes a finding that [the government’s] position was substantially justified.” Yang v. Shalala, 22 F.3d 213, 217 (9th Cir. 1994); see also United States v. $12,248 U.S. Currency, 957 F.2d 1513, 1517 (9th Cir. 1991). Fee award paid jointly by DOJ and DHS (50% each). Show
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