Jimmie Martin v. Commissioner of Social Securi
Opinion
Opinion
MEMORANDUM
Jimmie Leon Martin appeals the district court’s order denying his motion for attorneys’ fees under the Equal Access to Justice Act (“EAJA”). We have jurisdiction under 28 U.S.C. § 1291 . We review the district court’s order denying a motion for attorneys’ fees under EAJA for an abuse of discretion. Tobeler v. Colvin, 749 F.3d 830, 832 (9th Cir.2014). We reverse and remand.
EAJA provides that in a Social Security case, a court shall award attorneys’ fees to a prevailing party other than the United States “unless the court finds that the position of the United States was substantially justified or that special circumstances make an award unjust.” 28 U.S.C. § 2412 (d)(1)(A); Tobeler, 749 F.3d at 832 . The government must demonstrate that both its litigation position and the agency decision on review (that is, the administrative law judge’s decision) were substantially justified. Campbell v. Astrue, 736 F.3d 867, 868 (9th Cir.2013) (order).
Martin sought attorneys’ fees after this court issued a memorandum disposition reversing in part the district court’s summary judgment and remanding with instructions for the district court to remand to the Commissioner. In Martin’s…