Bianchi

Bianchi v. Perry

Good Law
154 F.3d 1023·42 Cont. Cas. Fed. 77,366·98 Daily Journal DAR 9543·1998 WL 554265·1998 U.S. App. LEXIS 21401
United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth CircuitSeptember 2, 1998No. 96-15869California840 words

Opinion

Lead Opinion

ORDER

We publish to answer a question that has arisen regarding the deadhne for filing motions for attorneys’ fees under the Equal Access to Justice Act.

We filed our opinion in this ease April 9, 1998. The clerk entered judgment that day pursuant to Federal Rule of Appellate Procedure 36. Bianchi prevailed. He attempted to file an apphcation in our court for fees and expenses pursuant to the Equal Access to Justice Act, 28 U.S.C. § 2412 , on June 15. The Clerk dechned to file the apphcation, and stamped it “received,” based on untimehness. Bianchi has now moved for an order to require the clerk to accept the filing as timely. We conclude that he is correct, and order the clerk to accept the filing.

The reason the Clerk dechned to accept the apphcation was that it was presented for filing more than 14 days after the time to petition for rehearing had run. Circuit Rule 39-1.6 requires attorneys’ fees apphcation to be filed “within 14 days from the expiration of the period within which a petition for rehearing or suggestion for rehearing en bane may be filed.” This deadhne is modified by the phrase “[ajbsent a statutory provision to the contrary.”

Because an officer of the…

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.