Huda

MEMORANDUM *

The Appellant, Mohamad Huda, appeals from the district court’s denial of his request for market-based attorney’s fees pursuant to the Equal Access to Justice Act, 28 U.S.C. § 2412 . Huda contends that he should have been awarded market-based fees under § 2412(b) because the defendant, the Commissioner of the Social Security Administration, acted in bad faith. Because the facts are familiar to the parties involved, we recount them only as necessary to explain our decision.

Bad faith fees are “typically invoked in cases of vexatious, wanton, or oppressive conduct.” Brown v. Sullivan, 916 F.2d 492, 495 (9th Cir.1990) (citations and internal quotations omitted). Such fees are only warranted in “exceptional cases ... for dominating reasons of justice.” Id. (quoting Beaudry Motor Co. v. Abko Properties, Inc., 780 F.2d 751, 756 (9th Cir.1986)). A district court’s determination of bad faith can be reversed only if it is clearly erroneous. Cazares v. Barber, 959 F.2d 758 , 754 (9th Cir.1992).

1. We affirm the district court’s holding that the administrative law judge’s (“ALJ’s”) initial use of an erroneous legal standard was not bad faith. Cf. Barry v. Bowen, 825 F.2d 1324,…