Owcp

ORDER

Respondent Arel Price’s application for attorney’s fees and costs under the Long-shore and Harbor Workers’ Compensation Act (“LHWCA”), 33 U.S.C. § 928 (a), is denied. This court lacks jurisdiction to entertain respondent’s application for fees accrued successfully opposing his employer’s petition for certiorari.

Although 33 U.S.C. § 928 (a) authorizes this court to award fees “in the successful prosecution” of a claim, § 928(c) states that a court “may approve an attor ney’s fee for the work done before it by the attorney for the claimant.” (Emphasis added.) In light of this language, we appear to lack jurisdiction to award fees to a claimant like Price, because the work undertaken in successfully opposing his employer’s certiorari petition was necessarily not done “before” this court.

The Supreme Court’s October 11, 2005 order denying Price’s fee application “without prejudice to filing in the United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit” does not explicitly delegate jurisdiction to us to grant Price fees. The only authority we have for interpreting the Court’s order favorably to Price is Hensley v. Washington Metropolitan Area Transit Authority, 690 F.2d 1054…