EAJA Awards (#314653)

Flores v. Garland
No. 2:85-cv-4544 (C.D. Cal.)
U.S. Department of Health and Human Services
OGC Childern, Family and Aging Division
National Center for Youth Law
577,286.09
Court
na
On June 22, 2022, the parties filed a Joint Motion for Preliminary Approval of Settlement and Approval of Class Notice of Settlement concerning ORR’s use of Emergency Intake Sites (“EIS”) facilities. This Settlement provides, in pertinent part, the standards the Government will meet while operating EISs including suitable living accommodations, access to daily outdoor activity, private phone calls at least twice a week for at least ten minutes in length, family reunification services, appropriate mental health interventions, educational services, legal services information, and structured leisure time activities. On September 23, 2022, the federal court granted final approval of the Settlement. The Government and lawyers for class members have agreed that the Government will pay class members’ attorneys’ fees and costs in the amount of $577,286.09 to compensate them for their work which resulted in the EIS Settlement.
Upon consideration of Plaintiffs’ Unopposed Motion for Final Approval of the Settlement Agreement [ECF No. 1329], Plaintiffs’ counsel’s declaration in support thereof [ECF No. 1338], and the parties’ Joint Stipulation to Dismiss EAJA Motion with Prejudice and Proposal Regarding Notice to Flores Class Members of Settlement (“Joint Stipulation”) [ECF No. 1310], and for the reasons stated on the record at the Final Fairness Hearing on April 14, 2023, the Court finds that: The parties engaged in non-collusive, arm’s-length negotiations to resolve Plaintiffs’ Motion for Attorneys’ Fees and Costs (“MAF”) [ECF No. 1282]; The proposed Settlement Agreement requires Defendants to pay Plaintiffs $577,286.09 in settlement of Plaintiffs’ claims and any potential claims for attorneys’ fees, litigation costs, and related expenses pursuant to the MAF, and the MAF supports an award of this size; There is no evidence of collusion between the parties regarding fees, or of Plaintiffs putting their interests in obtaining fees ahead of the interests of the Class; The Notice of the proposed Settlement Agreement provided to the Class satisfied the requirements of Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 23(e)(1) and due process; and Counsel have received no objections from Class Members or their family members concerning the proposed Settlement Agreement [see ECF Nos. 1327, 1338].