Nassco

Azua v. National Steel & Shipbuilding Co.

Good Law
534 F. App'x 618
United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth CircuitJuly 24, 201311-73104California547 words

Opinion

Opinion

MEMORANDUM

Petitioner Jesus Azua asserts three challenges to the Benefits Review Board’s (“BRB”) order approving an award of attorney’s fees to Azua under the Longshore and Harbor Workers’ Compensation Act. See 33 U.S.C. § 928 . Specifically, Azua contends that the administrative law judge (“ALJ”) erred in calculating the award by: (1) basing the hourly fee award on a national survey; (2) reducing the award by 20 percent to account for Azua’s limited success; and (3) excluding from the award ten of the eighteen hours spent preparing the fee application. This court reviews BRB decisions for abuse of discretion. Christensen v. Stevedoring Servs. of Am., 557 F.3d 1049, 1052 (9th Cir.2009). We address each of Azua’s claims in turn.

The BRB did not abuse its discretion in approving the ALJ’s use of national statistics to calculate the appropriate hourly rate for the fee award. The fee applicant has the burden of producing evidence to support the requested award. Id. at 1053 (citing Blum v. Stenson, 465 U.S. 886 , 896 n. 11, 104 S.Ct. 1541 , 79 L.Ed.2d 891 (1984)). The proffered fee evidence must reflect an appropriate rate in the relevant community, which in this case is San Diego.…

Sign in to read the full opinion

Create a free account to read the complete opinion text, citation history, and good-law status for this case.