Tremayne v. Commissioner of Social Security Administration

MEMORANDUM

Appellant Robyn Tremayne appeals the district court’s denial of her motion for attorney fees, brought under the Equal Access to Justice Act (EAJA), 28 U.S.C. § 2412 (d). As the facts and procedural history are familiar to the parties, we do not recite them here except as necessary to explain our disposition. We have jurisdiction under 28 U.S.C. § 1291 , and we affirm.

Under the EAJA, the prevailing party in a suit against the government is entitled to attorneys’ fees unless the court finds that the government’s position was “substantially justified.” Le v. Astrue, 529 F.3d 1200, 1201 (9th Cir.2008). Substantial justification “does not mean ‘justified to a high degree,’ but simply entails that the government must show that its position meets the traditional reasonableness standard — that is, ‘justified ... to a degree that could satisfy a reasonable person.’” Corbin v. Apfel, 149 F.3d 1051, 1052 (9th Cir.1998) (quoting Pierce v. Underwood, 487 U.S. 552, 565 , 108 S.Ct. 2541 , 101 L.Ed.2d 490 (1988)). A position can be substantially justified “even though it is not correct ... if it has a reasonable basis in law and fact.” Pierce, 487 U.S. at 566 n. 2, 108 S.Ct. 2541…