Hristov

DISCUSSION

Appellant Zlatko Hristov was prosecuted for marriage fraud in violation of United States law, and was acquitted on all charges by a jury. After acquittal, he filed a motion for attorney’s fees under the Hyde Amendment, but he omitted two required pieces of information: an allegation that his net worth was less than $2 million, and an itemized statement of attorney’s fees. The district court denied Hristov’s motion in a brief order on the merits of the claim, and denied as moot Hristov’s request to amend his motion with the missing informa- tion.2 Hristov timely appealed. The government, noting that Hristov’s original application was incomplete, urges that the failure to file a motion with all of the required information 1 This Circuit has determined that motions for attorney’s fees under the Hyde Amendment are civil, not criminal matters. United States v. Braun- stein, 281 F.3d 982, 992-93 (9th Cir. 2002). 2 We affirm the district court’s denial on the merits in a separately filed memorandum disposition. UNITED STATES v. HRISTOV 1181 within the thirty-day statutory deadline should be a complete bar to a Hyde Amendment attorney’s fees motion. We…