Douglas Yip v. Robert Little
Opinion
Opinion
MEMORANDUM
Douglas Yip (“Yip”) appeals his attorney’s fee award. According to Yip, the district court abused its discretion when it: 1) reduced his requested hourly rate from $350 to $275; 2) reduced his billed hours from 89.8 to 45; and 3) failed to award $826.76 in case-related expenses.
We agree that the district court abused its discretion in all three respects, because it failed to explain sufficiently its reasoning.
1. With regard to the appropriate hourly rate for the award of reasonable attorney’s fees under 29 U.S.C. § 1132 (g), the relevant metric is the market rate charged by similarly competent attorneys for representation of comparable complexity. Welch v. Metropolitan Life Ins. Co., 480 F.3d 942, 946 (9th Cir.2007). The attorney requesting fees bears the burden of demonstrating the reasonable market rate. Id. at 947 . An attorney may satisfy this burden by providing: 1) rate determinations in other cases; or 2) affidavits of other attorneys stating prevailing fees in the legal community. Id. (citation omitted). Absent objection, this evidence should be presumed to provide the reasonable market rate. Id.