Allen-Howard v. Commissioner Social Security Administration

MEMORANDUM

Kathleen Allen-Howard appeals the district court’s order denying her motion for attorney’s fees made pursuant to the Equal Access to Justice Act (“EAJA”). We review “the district court’s denial of attorney’s fees under EAJA for an abuse of discretion.” Meier v. Colvin, 727 F.3d 867, 869 (9th Cir.2013). We affirm.

“[A] court shall award to a prevailing party other than the United States fees ... incurred by that party in any civil action ... 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). The “‘position of the United States’ means, in addition to the position taken by the United States in the civil action, the action or failure to act by the agency upon which the civil action is based.” Id. § 2412(d)(2)(D). In determining whether the position of the United States was substantially justified, we “focus on two questions: first, whether the government was substantially justified in taking its original action; and, second, whether the government was substantially justified in defending the validity of the action in court.” Gutierrez v. Barnhart, 274…