Court, Explained
U.S. Federal District Courts
Back to docket
N.D. Cal.Procedural orderFiled Aug. 21, 2024

K.J. v. Kijakazi

Judge
Laurel Beeler
Docket
3:23-cv-03990
Court
U.S. District Court · Northern District of California
Pages
2
Fee PetitionSocial Security
In one sentence

In K.J. v. Kijakazi, Judge Beeler awarded $10,406.73 in attorney’s fees and expenses under the Equal Access to Justice Act after an SSI remand.

Who this affects

K.J., his attorney, and the Commissioner of the Social Security Administration.

What happened

K.J. sought fees after the court previously ruled for him in his challenge to the Social Security Administration’s denial of supplemental security income and remanded the case for calculating benefits.

The court granted K.J.’s motion and authorized $10,406.73 in fees and expenses. The Commissioner did not contest whether the government’s position was justified or the amount requested, but must check for K.J.’s outstanding federal debts and apply any required offset before paying the fees to his attorney.

Judge Laurel Beeler issued the order in K.J. v. Kijakazi.

The detailed version

For law students, journalists, and other readers who want the full reasoning

Case
K.J. v. Kijakazi · No. 3:23-cv-03990
Judge
Laurel Beeler
Date
Aug. 21, 2024

Background

K.J. moved for attorney’s fees and expenses under the Equal Access to Justice Act (EAJA), 28 U.S.C. § 2412. In the earlier round of this case, K.J. sought review of the Social Security Administration Commissioner’s final decision denying his claim for supplemental security income. The court granted K.J.’s motion for summary judgment, denied the Commissioner’s cross-motion, and remanded the case for calculating benefits.

Fee request

The court explained that a person who receives a remand under the relevant Social Security statute is a prevailing party for EAJA purposes. The EAJA generally requires an award of reasonable fees and costs to a prevailing party in a civil action against the United States unless the government’s position was substantially justified or special circumstances would make an award unfair. The court stated that the requested fees and expenses totaled $10,406.73 and that the Commissioner did not challenge either the government’s justification or the amount.

Ruling

Judge Laurel Beeler granted K.J.’s motion for attorney’s fees and expenses and authorized the $10,406.73 award. Before payment, the Commissioner must verify whether K.J. has outstanding federal debts and offset the payment to his attorney as required. The order does not state that the fee motion was granted with or without prejudice.

The authoritative version

Read the full 2-page opinion on CourtListener, the free public archive maintained by the Free Law Project.

Open opinion PDF →
Summary written with AI assistance. See how summaries are made. Spot something wrong? Tell us.