Zwolle v. Colvin
Court Docket Sheet

District of Alaska

4:2016-cv-00030 (akd)

JUDGMENT that Commissioner's decision is reversed; matter remanded for further proceedings. Signed by Judge H. Russel Holland on 4/7/17. (Additional attachment(s) added on 8/2/2017: # (1) Judgment with attorney fees and costs-redistributed)

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE DISTRICT OF ALASKA MARY F. ZWOLLE, Plaintiff, Case Number 4:16-cv-00030-HRH v. NANCY A. BERRYHILL, acting Commissioner of Social Security, Defendant. JUDGMENT IN A CIVIL CASE JURY VERDICT. This action came before the court for a trial by jury. The issues have been tried and the jury has rendered its verdict. XX DECISION BY COURT. This action came to trial or hearing before the Court. The issues have been tried or heard and a decision has been rendered. IT IS ORDERED AND ADJUDGED: THAT the Commissioner's decision is reversed and this matter is remanded for further proceedings consistent with the order filed at Clerk's Docket 16. APPROVED:/s/H. Russel Holland H. RUSSEL HOLLAND United States District Judge Date: April 7, 2017 NOTE: Award of prejudgment interest, Lesley K. Allen costs and attorney's fees are governed Lesley K. Allen, by D.Ak. LR 54.1, 54.3, and 58.1. Clerk of Court [Jmt2-Basic-rev. 1-13-16} Case 4:16-cv-00030-HRH Document 17 Filed 04/07/17 Page 1 of 1

MOTION for Leave to Appear as Pro Hac Vice (Non-Resident) Attorney Howard D. Olinsky. (Pro Hac Vice Admission fee $150.00 paid. Receipt number 097--2318829.) by Mary F. Zwolle.

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT DISTRICT OF ALASKA MARY F. ZWOLLE, Case No. 4:16-cv-00030-HRH Plaintiff(s), MOTION AND APPLICATION OF vs. NON-ELIGIBLE ATTORNEY FOR NANCY A. BERRYHILL, PERMISSION TO APPEAR AND Acting Commissioner of Social Security, PARTICIPATE IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT Defendant(s). FOR THE DISTRICT OF ALASKA To the Honorable Judge of the above-entitled court: I, Howard D. Olinsky, hereby apply for permission to appear and (name) participate as counsel for Mary F. Zwolle, plaintiff, (Name of party) (plaintiff/defendant) in the above-entitled cause pursuant to Rule 83.1 (d) of the Local Rules for the United States District Court, District of Alaska. I hereby apply for permission to appear and participate as counsel WITHOUT ASSOCIATION of local counsel because [check whichever of the following boxes apply, if any]: I am a registered participant in the CM/ECF System for the District of Alaska and consent to service by electronic means through the court's CM/ECF System. I have concurrently herewith submitted an application to the Clerk of the Court for registration as a participant in the CM/ECF System for the District of Alaska and consent to service by electronic means through the court's CM/ECF System. For the reasons set forth in the attached memorandum. Case 4:16-cv-00030-HRH Document 18 Filed 04/20/17 Page 1 of 4 OR I hereby designate, a member of the Bar of this court, (Name) who maintains an office at the place within the district, with whom the court and opposing counsel may readily communicate regarding conduct of this case. DATE: (Signature) Howard D. Olinsky (Printed Name) (Address) (City/State/Zip) (Telephone Number) (e-mail address) Consent of Local Counsel* I hereby consent to the granting of the foregoing application. DATE: (Signature) (Printed Name) (Address) (City, State, Zip) (Telephone) (*Member of the Bar of the United States District Court for the District of Alaska) Case 4:16-cv-00030-HRH Document 18 Filed 04/20/17 Page 2 of 4 DECLARATION OF NON-ELIGIBLE ATTORNEY Full Name: Howard D. Olinsky Business Address: 300 S. South Street, Ste. 420, Syracuse, NY 13202 (Mailing/Street) (City, State, ZIP) Residence: 4435 Swissvale Drive, Manlius, NY 13104 (Mailing/Street) (City, State, ZIP) Business Telephone: 315-701-5780 e-mail address: holinsky@windisability.com Other Names/Aliases: N/A Jurisdictions to Which Admitted and year of Admission: See attached sheet (Jurisdiction) (Address) (Year) (Jurisdiction) (Address) (Year) (Jurisdiction) (Address) (Year) (Jurisdiction) (Address) (Year) Are you the subject of any pending disciplinary proceeding in any jurisdiction to which admitted? Yes No (If Yes, provide details on a separate attached sheet) Have you ever been suspended from practice or disbarred in any jurisdiction to which admitted? Yes No (If Yes, provide details on a separate attached sheet) In accordance with D.AK. LR 83.1(d)(4)[A](vi), I certify I have read the District of Alaska local rules by visiting the court's website at http://www.akd.uscourts.gov and understand that the practices and procedures of this court may differ from the practices and procedures in the courts to which I am regularly admitted. A Certificate of Good Standing from a jurisdiction to which I have been admitted is attached. Pursuant to 28 U.S.C. §1746, I hereby declare under penalty of perjury that the foregoing information is true, correct, and accurate. Dated: April 20, 2017 s/Howard D. Olinsky (Signature of Applicant) Case 4:16-cv-00030-HRH Document 18 Filed 04/20/17 Page 3 of 4 Attachment to Pro Hac Vice Application for Howard D. Olinsky: Court Date of Admission In Good Standing? New York State 02/07/1986 YES State of Georgia 01/23/2014 YES United States Supreme Court 04/01/1991 YES Court of Appeals for 2nd Circuit 11/01/2002 YES Court of Appeals for 6th Circuit 10/15/2013 YES Court of Appeals for Federal Circuit 06/12/2007 YES U.S. Court of Veteran’s Appeals, Washington D.C. 06/12/2007 YES U.S.D.C., NDNY 04/22/1986 YES U.S.D.C., WDNY 01/29/2001 YES U.S.D.C., EDNY 03/21/2003 YES U.S.D.C., SDNY 03/25/2003 YES U.S.D.C., DCT 12/10/2010 YES U.S.D.C., NDFL 10/31/2011 YES U.S.D.C., EDMI 02/25/2013 YES U.S.D.C., WDMI 12/26/2013 YES U.S.D.C., EDTX 12/20/2013 YES U.S.D.C., EDAR 01/03/2014 YES U.S.D.C., WDAR 01/03/2014 YES U.S.D.C., MDGA 01/28/2014 YES U.S.D.C., NDIL 01/30/2014 YES U.S.D.C., NDGA 02/10/2014 YES U.S.D.C., EDWI 04/14/2014 YES U.S.D.C., NDTX 05/15/2014 YES U.S.D.C., DCO 06/18/2014 YES U.S.D.C., SDGA 06/02/2014 YES U.S.D.C., WDWI 07/03/2014 YES U.S.D.C., WDTX 09/15/2014 YES U.S.D.C., NDIN 08/04/2015 YES U.S.D.C., CDIL 09/24/2015 YES U.S.D.C., SDIL 09/25/2015 YES U.S.D.C., EDMO 04/13/2017 YES Case 4:16-cv-00030-HRH Document 18 Filed 04/20/17 Page 4 of 4

Certificate of Good Standing

AO 136 (Rev. 10/13) Certificate of Good Standing UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT for the Northern District of New York CERTIFICATE OF GOOD STANDING I, Lawrence K. Baerman, Clerk of this Court, certify that HOWARD D. OLINSKY, Bar # 102297, was duly admitted to practice in this Court on April 22, 1986, and is in good standing as a member of the Bar of this Court. Dated at Syracuse, New York on March 27, 2017 (Location) (Date) Lawrence K. Baerman CLERK DEPUTY CLERK Case 4:16-cv-00030-HRH Document 18-1 Filed 04/20/17 Page 1 of 1

ORDER granting [18] Application of Non-Resident Attorney

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE DISTRICT OF ALASKA NANCY A. BERRYHILL, Acting MARY F. ZWOLLE v. Commissioner of Social Security JUDGE H. RUSSEL HOLLAND CASE NO. 4:16-cv-0030-HRH PROCEEDINGS: ORDER FROM CHAMBERS The court has reviewed the motion for admission1 of non-resident attorney Howard D. Olinsky for permission to appear and participate in this case as counsel for plaintiff Mary F. Zwolle without the association of local counsel. The motion is granted. 1 Docket No. 18. Order from Chambers – Application of Non-Resident Attorney-1-Case 4:16-cv-00030-HRH Document 19 Filed 04/24/17 Page 1 of 1

First MOTION for Attorney Fees Pursuant to the Equal Access to Justice Act, 28 U.S.C Sect. 2412 by Mary F. Zwolle.

HOWARD D. OLINSKY, Esq. New York No. 2044865 Attorney for Plaintiff Admitted Pro Hac Vice Olinsky Law Group One Park Place 300 South State Street, Suite 420 Syracuse, New York 13202 Telephone: (315) 701-5780 Fax: (315) 701-5781 Email: fedctgroup@windisability.com UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT DISTRICT OF ALASKA MARY F. ZWOLLE, Plaintiff, Civil Action No. 4:16-CV-00030-HRH v-COMMISSIONER OF SOCIAL SECURITY, Defendant.-----------------------------------------------------------Motion for Attorney’s Fees Pursuant to the Equal Access to Justice Act, 28 U.S.C. § 2412 COMES NOW Plaintiff, by her attorney, Howard D. Olinsky, moves the court for an award to be paid by the Defendant under the Equal Access to Justice Act, 28 USCS § 2412. Plaintiff may receive an award under the Equal Access to Justice Act because she is the prevailing party, is an individual whose net worth did not exceed two million dollars when the action was filed, and the position of the United States and at the agency was not substantially justified. There are no special circumstances in this case which make an award under the EAJA unjust. Case 4:16-cv-00030-HRH Document 20 Filed 06/29/17 Page 1 of 2 This motion is supported by a Declaration of Plaintiff’s attorney, attached time and cost records and an Affidavit and Waiver of Direct Payment by the plaintiff. Executed this June 29, 2017 Respectfully submitted,/s/Howard D. Olinsky Howard D. Olinsky New York Bar # 2044865 Attorney for Plaintiff Admitted Pro Hac Vice Olinsky Law Group One Park Place 300 South State Street, Suite 420 Syracuse, New York 13202 Phone: (315) 701-5780 Fax: (315) 701-5781 Email: fedctgroup@windisability.com To: Joseph J. Langkamer, Esq. Special Assistant United States Attorney Office of the General Counsel Social Security Administration 701 Fifth Avenue, Suite 2900 M/S 221A Seattle, WA 98104-7075 Telephone: (206) 615-2212 Fax: (206) 615-2531 Email:joseph.langkamer@ssa.gov Case 4:16-cv-00030-HRH Document 20 Filed 06/29/17 Page 2 of 2

Proposed Order

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT DISTRICT OF ALASKA MARY F. ZWOLLE, Plaintiff, Civil Action No. 4:16-CV-00030-HRH-v-COMMISSIONER OF SOCIAL SECURITY, Defendant.-----------------------------------------------------------(Proposed) Order Awarding Attorney’s Fees pursuant to the Equal Access to Justice Act, 28 U.S.C. § 2412(d) Before the Court is the Motion of Plaintiff Mary F. Zwolle for award of attorney’s fees pursuant to the Equal Access to Justice Act, 28 U.S.C. § 2412(d). Based on the pleadings as well as the position of the defendant commissioner, if any, and recognizing the Plaintiff’s waiver of direct payment and assignment of EAJA to her counsel, IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that attorney fees, expenses, and costs in the total amount of Five Thousand Four Hundred Ninety-One Dollars and Fifty-Two Cents ($5,491.52) pursuant to the Equal Access to Justice Act, 28 U.S.C. § 2412(d) are awarded to Plaintiff. Astrue v. Ratliff, 130 S.Ct. 2521 (2010). The Court hereby awards EAJA fees, broken down as follows: 1. Plaintiff is awarded $5,472.86 for paralegal and attorney’s fees under 28 U.S.C. § 2412(d); 2. Plaintiff is awarded $18.66 in expenses for Certified Mail for service of Summons and Complaint. If the U.S. Department of the Treasury determines that Plaintiff’s EAJA fees, expenses, and costs are not subject to offset allowed under the Department of the Treasury’s Offset Program (TOPS), then the check for EAJA fees, expenses, and costs shall be made payable to Plaintiff’s attorney, Paul Eaglin. Whether the check is made payable to Plaintiff or to Howard D. Olinsky, the check shall be mailed to Howard D. Olinsky at the following address: 300 South State Street Case 4:16-cv-00030-HRH Document 20-1 Filed 06/29/17 Page 1 of 2 Suite 420 Syracuse, NY 13202 So ordered. Date: ________________ ______________________________ H. Russell Holland United States District Judge [proposed Order proffer: Howard D. Olinsky; copy to Joseph J. Langkamer] Case 4:16-cv-00030-HRH Document 20-1 Filed 06/29/17 Page 2 of 2

DECLARATION of Howard D. Olinsky, Esq. re [20] First MOTION for Attorney Fees Pursuant to the Equal Access to Justice Act, 28 U.S.C Sect. 2412 by Mary F. Zwolle.

HOWARD D. OLINSKY, Esq. New York No. 2044865 Attorney for Plaintiff Admitted Pro Hac Vice Olinsky Law Group One Park Place 300 South State Street, Suite 420 Syracuse, New York 13202 Telephone: (315) 701-5780 Fax: (315) 701-5781 Email: fedctgroup@windisability.com UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT DISTRICT OF ALASKA MARY F. ZWOLLE, Plaintiff, Civil Action No. 4:16-CV-00030-HRH-v-COMMISSIONER OF SOCIAL SECURITY, Defendant.-----------------------------------------------------------Attorney’s Affirmation In Support Of Fees Pursuant To the Equal Access to Justice Act, 28 U.S.C. § 2412 ________________________________________ STATE OF NEW YORK) COUNTY OF ONONDAGA) ss: Howard D. Olinsky, affirms and declares as follows: 1. I am an attorney licensed to practice law in the State of New York and admitted to the District of Alaska Federal Court Pro Hac Vice and I am the plaintiff’s attorney in this matter. 2. I make this affirmation knowing that the Court will rely upon it assessing any awards under the Equal Access to Justice Act disposed of under 28 USCS § 2412. 3. There are no special circumstances in this case which make an award under the EAJA unjust. Case 4:16-cv-00030-HRH Document 21 Filed 06/29/17 Page 1 of 3 4. The Court ordered on April 6, 2017 that the above-entitled case be remanded for further proceedings, under the fourth sentence of 42 U.S.C. § 405(g). 5. For the Equal Access to Justice Act, I am requesting an hourly rate of $192.68 for attorney time. See generally, http://www.ca9.uscourts.gov/content/view.php?pk_id=0000000039 U.S.C.A 9th Circuit EAJA Table. If attorney fees are calculated at this rate for 24.2 hours of work performed, they total $4,662.86. 6. I am also requesting $100.00 per hour for 8.1 hours of paralegal time equaling $810.00. I am requesting $5,472.86 for Counsel Fees which includes both attorney and paralegal time. 7. The time accounting is presented to the court in two fashions. The total compensable time spent by all professional staff (Exhibit A); the total compensable time spent by all attorneys (Exhibit B); the total compensable time spent by paralegals (Exhibit C). The attorneys involved in this case are as follows: Paul B. Eaglin, Esq., Howard D. Olinsky, Esq., and Edward Wicklund, Esq. The paralegals involved in working on this case are as follows: Shannon Persse, Michelle Callahan, Kyrsten Gifford, Michael Smith, Vincent Wisehoon, and Tamica Lockwood. 8. I am requesting reimbursement of expenses in the amount $18.66 for Certified Mail for service of the summons and complaint as shown in Exhibit D. 9. All services on this case were rendered by your affiant and my professional staff, unless specifically noted otherwise. The attached records were created and stored in the firms Prevail Database, and are printed out and attached. The itemized time represents hours spent preparing and handling this case for U.S. District Court. Clerical time is not included in this petition or has been zeroed out. 10. Attached is the Fee Agreement duly executed by the plaintiff (Exhibit E). Case 4:16-cv-00030-HRH Document 21 Filed 06/29/17 Page 2 of 3 Waiver of Direct Payment of EAJA Fees 11. Attached is an Affidavit and Waiver of Direct Payment duly executed by the plaintiff (Exhibit F). With this Waiver, if Plaintiff owes a debt that qualifies under the Treasury Offset Program (31 USCS § 3716), any payment shall be made payable to the Plaintiff and delivered to the Plaintiff’s attorney. If the United States Department of Treasury determines that Plaintiff owes no debt subject to offset, the government will pay such fees directly to the Plaintiff’s attorney. Astrue v. Ratliff, 560 U.S. 586 (U.S. 2010). Executed this June 29, 2017 Respectfully submitted,/s/Howard D. Olinsky Howard D. Olinsky New York Bar # 2044865 Attorney for Plaintiff Admitted Pro Hac Vice Olinsky Law Group One Park Place 300 South State Street, Suite 420 Syracuse, New York 13202 Phone: (315) 701-5780 Email: fedctgroup@windisability.com To: Joseph J. Langkamer, Esq. Special Assistant United States Attorney Office of the General Counsel Social Security Administration 701 Fifth Avenue, Suite 2900 M/S 221A Seattle, WA 98104-7075 Telephone: (206) 615-2212 Fax: (206) 615-2531 Email:joseph.langkamer@ssa.gov Case 4:16-cv-00030-HRH Document 21 Filed 06/29/17 Page 3 of 3

Exhibit A All Professional Time

Exhibit A Ledger Zwolle, Mary F. Date  Subject Hours Timekeeper 8/18/2016 Files received, reviewed and processed from referral source for Attorney review 0.6 Gifford, Kyrsten 8/18/2016 Correspondence to Client re: Referral acknowledgment letter 0.2 Gifford, Kyrsten 8/23/2016 Telephone call with Client re: Attempt debt conference call-left VM 0 Lockwood, Tamica 8/29/2016 Telephone Call with Client re: Completed debt conference call, updated address 0.4 Lockwood, Tamica 8/31/2016 Review file to determine whether to take case 1 Wicklund, Edward A. 9/1/2016 FDC prospect packet prepared for Client completion 0.6 Lockwood, Tamica 9/7/2016 Telephone call with Client re: Assistance with In Forma Pauperis application 0.4 Lockwood, Tamica 9/9/2016 FDC Prospect packet sent via Right Sig for client completion 0.2 Lockwood, Tamica 9/12/2016 Federal court forms returned via Right Signature, review for completion 0.3 Smith, Michael P. 9/28/2016 Draft complaint, proposed summons, civil cover sheet, and letter to clerk 0.8 Eaglin, Paul B. 9/28/2016 Review motion for leave to proceed in forma pauperis, approve for filing 0.2 Eaglin, Paul B. 9/28/2016 Email Initiating case documents to the clerk for filing/docketing 0.1 Smith, Michael P. 9/29/2016 Federal Court-Accept Letter-New FDC Filing 0.3 Smith, Michael P. 9/29/2016 Download, file, save and distribute ECF re: Complaint 0 Lockwood, Tamica 9/29/2016 Download, file, save and distribute ECF re: Civil Cover Sheet 0 Lockwood, Tamica 9/29/2016 Download, file, save and distribute ECF re: Motion for Leave in Forma Pauperis 0 Lockwood, Tamica 9/29/2016 Download, file, save and distribute ECF re: Unissued summons 0 Lockwood, Tamica 9/29/2016 Download, file, save & distribute ECF re: Order directing service, granting IFP 0 Lockwood, Tamica 9/29/2016 Review Order granting In Forma Pauperis status, directing service of process 0.1 Eaglin, Paul B. 9/29/2016 Download, file, save and distribute ECF re: Summons issued (notice only) 0 Lockwood, Tamica 9/29/2016 Review Summons Issued (text notice only) 0.1 Eaglin, Paul B. 10/3/2016 Received and processed Issued Summons via USPS 0.2 Smith, Michael P. 10/3/2016 Review Summons Issued 0.2 Eaglin, Paul B. 10/7/2016 Certified Mail Expense Summons and Complaint packets to Defendant's offices 0 Callahan, Michelle 10/7/2016 Federal Court-Service of Process-Prepare Service packets USAO, OGC, AG 0.6 Callahan, Michelle 10/17/2016 Download, file, save electronic return receipts USAO, OCG and AG 0 Callahan, Michelle 10/17/2016 Download, file, save and distribute ECF re: NOA Joseph John Langkamer 0 Lockwood, Tamica 10/17/2016 Review Notice of appearance Joseph John Langkamer o/b/o Carolyn Colvin 0.1 Eaglin, Paul B. 10/19/2016 Combine and file proof of service via CM/ECF 0.3 Callahan, Michelle 10/19/2016 Download, file, save and distribute ECF re: Summons returned executed 0 Lockwood, Tamica 10/19/2016 Review Summons executed, record answer due date for monitoring 0.2 Eaglin, Paul B. 10/25/2016 Download, file, save and distribute ECF re: SS scheduling order 0 Lockwood, Tamica 10/25/2016 Review Social Security scheduling order, calendar deadlines on task pad 0.3 Eaglin, Paul B. 10/25/2016 Download, file, save and distribute ECF re: Docket annotation brief event 0 Lockwood, Tamica 10/25/2016 Review Docket annotation brief filing event 0.1 Eaglin, Paul B. 11/28/2016 Download, file, save and distribute ECF re: NOA Richard L. Pomeroy 0 Lockwood, Tamica 11/28/2016 Review Notice of appearance Richard L. Pomeroy o/b/o Carolyn Colvin 0.1 Eaglin, Paul B. 12/12/2016 Download, file, save and distribute ECF re: Answer to complaint 0 Lockwood, Tamica 12/12/2016 Review Answer to complaint 0.1 Eaglin, Paul B. 12/12/2016 Download, file and save federal court transcript in ten (10) parts 0.3 Lockwood, Tamica 32.30 <Filter is Empty> Case 4:16-cv-00030-HRH Document 21-1 Filed 06/29/17 Page 2 of 3 Date  Subject Hours Timekeeper 12/14/2016 Combine, OCR, and Live Bookmark Federal Court Transcript (612 pages) 0.7 Lockwood, Tamica 12/14/2016 Preliminary review of transcript-assign Attorney writer 0.5 Eaglin, Paul B. 1/11/2017 Draft and file motion for extension to file brief 0 Eaglin, Paul B. 1/11/2017 Download, file, save and distribute ECF re: Consent motion for extension 0 Lockwood, Tamica 1/12/2017 Download, file, save and distribute ECF re: Order granting extension request 0 Lockwood, Tamica 1/12/2017 Review order granting Plaintiff extension request, update task pad 0 Eaglin, Paul B. 1/12/2017 Review order granting Plaintiff extension request, update my calendar (writer) 0 Wicklund, Edward A. 1/18/2017 Review certified administrative record and take notes 1.5 Wicklund, Edward A. 1/19/2017 Continue reviewing CAR, taking notes and organizing facts 5.1 Wicklund, Edward A. 1/20/2017 Drafting procedural section, drafting facts 1.6 Wicklund, Edward A. 1/23/2017 Continue drafting facts and start research 1.3 Wicklund, Edward A. 1/24/2017 Continue research and drafting arguments 3.5 Wicklund, Edward A. 1/25/2017 Continue research and drafting arguments 3.8 Wicklund, Edward A. 1/25/2017 Senior Attorney review draft brief, suggest edits 0.9 Eaglin, Paul B. 1/25/2017 Implement suggested edits, finalize and file brief (n/c for filing) 0.7 Wicklund, Edward A. 1/26/2017 Download, file, save and distribute ECF re: Motion to remand 0 Lockwood, Tamica 2/23/2017 Download, file, save and distribute ECF re: Docket Annotation Berryhill 0 Lockwood, Tamica 2/23/2017 Review Docket annotation Berryhill substituted for Colvin 0.1 Eaglin, Paul B. 2/24/2017 Download, file, save and distribute ECF re: Response in opposition 0 Lockwood, Tamica 2/24/2017 Review Defendant's response in opposition to motion (11 pages) 0.4 Eaglin, Paul B. 2/24/2017 Assign Attorney writer to access/write reply 0.2 Eaglin, Paul B. 3/3/2017 Correspondence to Client re: Federal Court-Fully Briefed Case Docs to Client 0 Vincent Wisehoon 3/10/2017 Review file, reply brief assessment-NO REPLY warranted 0.3 Wicklund, Edward A. 4/6/2017 Download, file, save and distribute ECF re: Order reversed and remanded 0 Lockwood, Tamica 4/6/2017 Review Order reversing and remanding (11 pages) 0.4 Eaglin, Paul B. 4/7/2017 Correspondence to Client re: FDC Remand 0.2 Callahan, Michelle 4/7/2017 Federal Court-Remand Referral back to Referral Source 0.3 Callahan, Michelle 4/7/2017 Download, file, save and distribute ECF re: Judgment 0 Lockwood, Tamica 4/7/2017 Review Judgment in favor of Mary F. Zwolle 0.1 Eaglin, Paul B. 4/20/2017 Draft motion for pro hac vice re: Howard D. Olinsky, Esq. 0 Olinsky, Howard D. 4/20/2017 File Motion for Howard D. Olinsky to appear Pro Hac Vice 0 Callahan, Michelle 4/20/2017 Download, file, save and distribute ECF re: Motion for pro hac vice HDO 0 Lockwood, Tamica 4/24/2017 Download, file, save and distribute ECF re: Order granting Pro Hac Vice 0 Lockwood, Tamica 4/24/2017 Review Order granting Pro Hac Vice application 0 Olinsky, Howard D. 6/28/2017 EAJA Preparation 1.5 Persse, Shannon 6/29/2017 Review Timeslips Finalize EAJA Motion 0.5 Olinsky, Howard D. 6/29/2017 Ready EAJA Narrative, Time Records, Exhibits, Certificate. File per Local Rule 0.9 Persse, Shannon 32.30 <Filter is Empty> Case 4:16-cv-00030-HRH Document 21-1 Filed 06/29/17 Page 3 of 3

Exhibit B Attorney Time

Exhibit B Ledger Zwolle, Mary F. Date  Subject Hours Timekeeper 8/31/2016 Review file to determine whether to take case 1 Wicklund, Edward A. 9/28/2016 Draft complaint, proposed summons, civil cover sheet, and letter to clerk 0.8 Eaglin, Paul B. 9/28/2016 Review motion for leave to proceed in forma pauperis, approve for filing 0.2 Eaglin, Paul B. 9/29/2016 Review Order granting In Forma Pauperis status, directing service of process 0.1 Eaglin, Paul B. 9/29/2016 Review Summons Issued (text notice only) 0.1 Eaglin, Paul B. 10/3/2016 Review Summons Issued 0.2 Eaglin, Paul B. 10/17/2016 Review Notice of appearance Joseph John Langkamer o/b/o Carolyn Colvin 0.1 Eaglin, Paul B. 10/19/2016 Review Summons executed, record answer due date for monitoring 0.2 Eaglin, Paul B. 10/25/2016 Review Social Security scheduling order, calendar deadlines on task pad 0.3 Eaglin, Paul B. 10/25/2016 Review Docket annotation brief filing event 0.1 Eaglin, Paul B. 11/28/2016 Review Notice of appearance Richard L. Pomeroy o/b/o Carolyn Colvin 0.1 Eaglin, Paul B. 12/12/2016 Review Answer to complaint 0.1 Eaglin, Paul B. 12/14/2016 Preliminary review of transcript-assign Attorney writer 0.5 Eaglin, Paul B. 1/11/2017 Draft and file motion for extension to file brief 0 Eaglin, Paul B. 1/12/2017 Review order granting Plaintiff extension request, update task pad 0 Eaglin, Paul B. 1/12/2017 Review order granting Plaintiff extension request, update my calendar (writer) 0 Wicklund, Edward A. 1/18/2017 Review certified administrative record and take notes 1.5 Wicklund, Edward A. 1/19/2017 Continue reviewing CAR, taking notes and organizing facts 5.1 Wicklund, Edward A. 1/20/2017 Drafting procedural section, drafting facts 1.6 Wicklund, Edward A. 1/23/2017 Continue drafting facts and start research 1.3 Wicklund, Edward A. 1/24/2017 Continue research and drafting arguments 3.5 Wicklund, Edward A. 1/25/2017 Continue research and drafting arguments 3.8 Wicklund, Edward A. 1/25/2017 Senior Attorney review draft brief, suggest edits 0.9 Eaglin, Paul B. 1/25/2017 Implement suggested edits, finalize and file brief (n/c for filing) 0.7 Wicklund, Edward A. 2/23/2017 Review Docket annotation Berryhill substituted for Colvin 0.1 Eaglin, Paul B. 2/24/2017 Review Defendant's response in opposition to motion (11 pages) 0.4 Eaglin, Paul B. 2/24/2017 Assign Attorney writer to access/write reply 0.2 Eaglin, Paul B. 3/10/2017 Review file, reply brief assessment-NO REPLY warranted 0.3 Wicklund, Edward A. 4/6/2017 Review Order reversing and remanding (11 pages) 0.4 Eaglin, Paul B. 4/7/2017 Review Judgment in favor of Mary F. Zwolle 0.1 Eaglin, Paul B. 4/20/2017 Draft motion for pro hac vice re: Howard D. Olinsky, Esq. 0 Olinsky, Howard D. 4/24/2017 Review Order granting Pro Hac Vice application 0 Olinsky, Howard D. 6/29/2017 Review Timeslips Finalize EAJA Motion 0.5 Olinsky, Howard D. 24.20 ((Timekeeper = Eaglin, Paul B.) or (Timekeeper = Olinsky, Howard D.) or (Timekeeper = Wicklund, Edward A.))    Case 4:16-cv-00030-HRH Document 21-2 Filed 06/29/17 Page 2 of 2

Exhibit C Paralegal Time

Exhibit C Ledger Zwolle, Mary F. Date  Subject Hours Timekeeper 8/18/2016 Files received, reviewed and processed from referral source for Attorney review 0.6 Gifford, Kyrsten 8/18/2016 Correspondence to Client re: Referral acknowledgment letter 0.2 Gifford, Kyrsten 8/23/2016 Telephone call with Client re: Attempt debt conference call-left VM 0 Lockwood, Tamica 8/29/2016 Telephone Call with Client re: Completed debt conference call, updated address 0.4 Lockwood, Tamica 9/1/2016 FDC prospect packet prepared for Client completion 0.6 Lockwood, Tamica 9/7/2016 Telephone call with Client re: Assistance with In Forma Pauperis application 0.4 Lockwood, Tamica 9/9/2016 FDC Prospect packet sent via Right Sig for client completion 0.2 Lockwood, Tamica 9/12/2016 Federal court forms returned via Right Signature, review for completion 0.3 Smith, Michael P. 9/28/2016 Email Initiating case documents to the clerk for filing/docketing 0.1 Smith, Michael P. 9/29/2016 Federal Court-Accept Letter-New FDC Filing 0.3 Smith, Michael P. 9/29/2016 Download, file, save and distribute ECF re: Complaint 0 Lockwood, Tamica 9/29/2016 Download, file, save and distribute ECF re: Civil Cover Sheet 0 Lockwood, Tamica 9/29/2016 Download, file, save and distribute ECF re: Motion for Leave in Forma Pauperis 0 Lockwood, Tamica 9/29/2016 Download, file, save and distribute ECF re: Unissued summons 0 Lockwood, Tamica 9/29/2016 Download, file, save & distribute ECF re: Order directing service, granting IFP 0 Lockwood, Tamica 9/29/2016 Download, file, save and distribute ECF re: Summons issued (notice only) 0 Lockwood, Tamica 10/3/2016 Received and processed Issued Summons via USPS 0.2 Smith, Michael P. 10/7/2016 Certified Mail Expense Summons and Complaint packets to Defendant's offices 0 Callahan, Michelle 10/7/2016 Federal Court-Service of Process-Prepare Service packets USAO, OGC, AG 0.6 Callahan, Michelle 10/17/2016 Download, file, save electronic return receipts USAO, OCG and AG 0 Callahan, Michelle 10/17/2016 Download, file, save and distribute ECF re: NOA Joseph John Langkamer 0 Lockwood, Tamica 10/19/2016 Combine and file proof of service via CM/ECF 0.3 Callahan, Michelle 10/19/2016 Download, file, save and distribute ECF re: Summons returned executed 0 Lockwood, Tamica 10/25/2016 Download, file, save and distribute ECF re: SS scheduling order 0 Lockwood, Tamica 10/25/2016 Download, file, save and distribute ECF re: Docket annotation brief event 0 Lockwood, Tamica 11/28/2016 Download, file, save and distribute ECF re: NOA Richard L. Pomeroy 0 Lockwood, Tamica 12/12/2016 Download, file, save and distribute ECF re: Answer to complaint 0 Lockwood, Tamica 12/12/2016 Download, file and save federal court transcript in ten (10) parts 0.3 Lockwood, Tamica 12/14/2016 Combine, OCR, and Live Bookmark Federal Court Transcript (612 pages) 0.7 Lockwood, Tamica 1/11/2017 Download, file, save and distribute ECF re: Consent motion for extension 0 Lockwood, Tamica 1/12/2017 Download, file, save and distribute ECF re: Order granting extension request 0 Lockwood, Tamica 1/26/2017 Download, file, save and distribute ECF re: Motion to remand 0 Lockwood, Tamica 2/23/2017 Download, file, save and distribute ECF re: Docket Annotation Berryhill 0 Lockwood, Tamica 2/24/2017 Download, file, save and distribute ECF re: Response in opposition 0 Lockwood, Tamica 3/3/2017 Correspondence to Client re: Federal Court-Fully Briefed Case Docs to Client 0 Vincent Wisehoon 4/6/2017 Download, file, save and distribute ECF re: Order reversed and remanded 0 Lockwood, Tamica 4/7/2017 Correspondence to Client re: FDC Remand 0.2 Callahan, Michelle 4/7/2017 Federal Court-Remand Referral back to Referral Source 0.3 Callahan, Michelle 4/7/2017 Download, file, save and distribute ECF re: Judgment 0 Lockwood, Tamica 4/20/2017 File Motion for Howard D. Olinsky to appear Pro Hac Vice 0 Callahan, Michelle 8.10 ((Timekeeper = Callahan, Michelle) or (Timekeeper = Gifford, Kyrsten) or (Timekeeper = Lockwood, Tamica) or (Timekeeper = Per...    Case 4:16-cv-00030-HRH Document 21-3 Filed 06/29/17 Page 2 of 3 Date  Subject Hours Timekeeper 4/20/2017 Download, file, save and distribute ECF re: Motion for pro hac vice HDO 0 Lockwood, Tamica 4/24/2017 Download, file, save and distribute ECF re: Order granting Pro Hac Vice 0 Lockwood, Tamica 6/28/2017 EAJA Preparation 1.5 Persse, Shannon 6/29/2017 Ready EAJA Narrative, Time Records, Exhibits, Certificate. File per Local Rule 0.9 Persse, Shannon 8.10 ((Timekeeper = Callahan, Michelle) or (Timekeeper = Gifford, Kyrsten) or (Timekeeper = Lockwood, Tamica) or (Timekeeper = Per...    Case 4:16-cv-00030-HRH Document 21-3 Filed 06/29/17 Page 3 of 3

Exhibit D Expenses

Exhibit D Ledger Zwolle, Mary F. Date  Subject Amount Timekeeper 10/7/2016 Certified Mail Expense Summons and Complaint packets to Defendant's offices $18.66 Callahan, Michelle $18.66 (Type = Cost) and (Category = FC Expense-)    Case 4:16-cv-00030-HRH Document 21-4 Filed 06/29/17 Page 2 of 2

Exhibit E Fee Agreement

Exhibit E FEE AGREEMENT-FEDERAL COURT SOCIAL SECURITY APPEAL 1. SCOPE OF REPRESENTATION: I hereby employ the attorneys at Olinsky Law Group ("OLG" or "my federal court attorney") to represent me during a federal court review of my Social Security case. The scope of representation consists of appealing a final decision that I am not disabled, which was made by the Social Security Administration ("SSA"), to a United States District Court. Representation may also include appealing an unfavorable decision from a United States District Court to a United States Court of Appeals; however an appeal to a United States Court of Appeals is at the discretion of my federal court attorney. References to "federal court" in this agreement will include representation before a United States Court of Appeals if my case is appealed to that court. 2. ATTORNEY’S FEE: I understand that if my federal court attorney wins my case in federal court, which means that either my case is remanded to the SSA for further proceedings pursuant to sentence 4 or sentence 6 of § 205(g) of the Social Security Act and/or the federal court enters a directed finding that I am disabled, my federal court attorney will petition for an award of attorney fees for work performed at the federal court(s) pursuant to the Equal Access to Justice Act ("EAJA"). I understand that an EAJA award is paid by the government, does not come from my back benefits, and any award must be approved by the federal court. I hereby assign any court-awarded EAJA attorney fees to my federal court attorney. I agree that any such payment belongs to my federal court attorney. I authorize my federal court attorney to settle the amount of any EAJA fee using his or her professional judgment. I agree to cooperate in any way that I can so that my federal court attorney’s full fee is authorized. If my federal court attorney receives an EAJA check made payable to me, I hereby explicitly give authority to my federal attorney to endorse the check with my name and deposit it in my federal court attorney’s general office account. I hereby state that my net worth is less than $2,000,000.00. I understand that my federal court attorney may receive the EAJA award as his or her sole compensation for representing me in court. However, I understand that my federal court attorney also has the right to ask the court to award any remaining balance of 25% of my past-due benefits ("406(b) fees") for representing me in federal court. My federal court attorney has this right if the representative, who represents me during remand proceedings, does not collect the full 25% of my past-due benefits during a remand proceeding; and also if (1) my case is remanded pursuant to sentence 6 of § 205(g) of the Social Security Act; or (2) my case is remanded pursuant to sentence 4 of § 205(g) of the Social Security Act and my federal court attorney is unable to collect the authorized EAJA award due to any unpaid federal debt that I may have at the conclusion of the federal case; or if I failed to effectively assign the EAJA award to my federal court attorney; or at the discretion of my federal court attorney. I understand that if the court awards my federal court attorney a fee out of my past-due benefits and also awards an EAJA fee for that same work, my federal court attorney must refund the smaller fee to me. I understand that the SSA will withhold my past-due benefits and will send any approved fee to my federal court attorney. If SSA, through error, fails to withhold my federal court attorney’s fee and pays the legal fee to me by mistake (which sometimes happens), I will pay my federal court attorney promptly from the back benefits I receive. If my retroactive payment is released in installments, I agree that I will pay the entire authorized federal court attorney’s fee from the first installment. I understand that the total fee could amount to many thousands of dollars. I understand that my federal court attorney may seek the maximum fee this contract allows under the law. My federal court attorney does not promise to minimize either the EAJA or 406(b) fees he or she seeks and/or receives. Case 4:16-cv-00030-HRH Document 21-5 Filed 06/29/17 Page 2 of 3 I understand that if my case loses in federal court, which means that the federal court affirms the decision of the SSA that I am not disabled, my federal court attorney is not entitled to a fee for his or her time spent representing me in federal court. 3. CONSENT TO EXCHANGE OF INFORMATION: I agree that the OLG and any representative(s) that represented me before SSA for the case that is being appealed to federal court may share (1) my contact information, (2) information regarding my case in federal court, including documents filed in court, (3) my SSA exhibit file including all my medical records, and (4) information regarding the status of any remand proceedings. I agree that if a federal court remands my case, the OLG may refer my case to Law Offices of Ogle, Elrod, & Baril for possible representation on remand. I agree that the OLG may share (1) my contact information, (2) information regarding my federal court case, including documents filed in court, (3) my SSA exhibit file including all my medical records, and (4) information regarding the status of any remand proceedings, with Law Offices of Ogle, Elrod, & Baril. I acknowledge that the United States District Court will issue a written decision on my case, and that decision is a matter of public record which may be published on the internet by case reporting services. 4. TERMINATION OF AGREEMENT AND CONSENT TO PROVIDE UPDATED CONTACT INFORMATION: This agreement terminates at the option of my federal court attorney if we lose at the United States District Court. My federal court attorney will mail me a copy of the court’s final decision at the last address I provide my federal court attorney. I agree to inform my federal court attorney each time I change my mailing address and/or telephone number. 5. I HAVE NOT BEEN PROMISED THAT I WILL WIN: My federal court attorney has not promised that I will win my case. I recognize that I may lose my case. I am aware that a federal court may take several years to decide my case. This agreement supersedes and replaces any previous fee agreement I may have signed with any attorney for representation at Federal Court. It does not supersede or replace any fee agreement made for representation before the Social Security Administration. Dated: September 9, 2016 Signature: __________________________________ Claimant Name: Mary F. Zwolle Claimant Social Security Number: Dated: __________ Signature: ___________________________________ Howard D. Olinsky, Esq. Case 4:16-cv-00030-HRH Document 21-5 Filed 06/29/17 Page 3 of 3

Exhibit F Affirmation and Waiver of Direct Payment of EAJA Fees

Exhibit F UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT DISTRICT OF ALASKA ({[ERROR]} DIVISION)--------------------------------------------------------------MARY F. ZWOLLE, AFFIRMATION AND WAIVER OF DIRECT PAYMENT Plaintiff, OF EAJA FEES v. Civil Action No.: _________________ CAROLYN W. COLVIN, COMMISSIONER OF SOCIAL SECURITY, Defendant.---------------------------------------------------------------Mary F. Zwolle, hereby states the following: 1. I am the Plaintiff in the above-captioned matter. 2. That I have retained Olinsky Law Group as my attorney for the above-captioned matter. 3. At the time that this action was begun, my net worth was less than $2,000,000.00. 4. If my case is remanded by the Federal Court, either by stipulation or order, my attorney may file for attorney’s fees pursuant to the Equal Access to Justice Act (EAJA). I understand that the EAJA fees are paid by the Federal Government and do not come from any back benefits owed to me by the Social Security Administration. 5. I hereby agree to waive direct payment of the EAJA fees and assign said fees to be paid directly to my attorney. 6. I understand that my attorney may still petition the Administration for legal fees for his or her work before the Administration that will be paid from my back benefits. As the Plaintiff in this case, I hereby declare and affirm under penalty of perjury that the information above is true and correct. Executed on September 9, 2016. __________________________ Mary F. Zwolle Plaintiff Case 4:16-cv-00030-HRH Document 21-6 Filed 06/29/17 Page 2 of 2

Memorandum In Support

HOWARD D. OLINSKY, Esq. New York No. 2044865 Attorney for Plaintiff Admitted Pro Hac Vice Olinsky Law Group One Park Place 300 South State Street, Suite 420 Syracuse, New York 13202 Telephone: (315) 701-5780 Fax: (315) 701-5781 Email: fedctgroup@windisability.com UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT DISTRICT OF ALASKA MARY F. ZWOLLE, Plaintiff, Civil Action No. 4:16-CV-00030-HRH-v-COMMISSIONER OF SOCIAL SECURITY, Defendant.-----------------------------------------------------------Memorandum in Support of Plaintiff’s Petition for Counsel Fee Allowance Under Equal Access to Justice Act 1. This is a memorandum in support of a petition for an award of Counsel Fees under the Equal Access to Justice Act, 28 USCS § 2412 "EAJA." 2. An EAJA award is available to a "prevailing party" in a case against the Federal Government, including Social Security cases, in the following instances: (a) When and if the plaintiff actually "prevails"; (b) The Government’s position in litigation is "not substantially justified"; (c) Plaintiff is a party whose net assets are worth less than two million dollars; and Case 4:16-cv-00030-HRH Document 21-7 Filed 06/29/17 Page 1 of 3 (d) The case has concluded with a "final order" which is non-appealable, or will not be appealed. 3. Addressing these elements in reverse order, it is clear that the Plaintiff has met the burden necessary to receive EAJA fees. (a) Plaintiff’s net worth did not exceed $2,000,000.00 when this action was filed. (b) After service of the summons and complaint and submission of a brief by the both parties, District Judge Hon. H. Russell Holland signed an Order on April 6, 2017 remanding this matter to the Commissioner for further proceedings pursuant to Sentence Four of 42 U.S.C. § 405(g). (c) Judgment was entered on April 7, 2017. The Judgment has not been appealed. (d) Plaintiff has prevailed because the District Court remanded the case under sentence four of 42 U.S.C. § 405(g). Shalala v. Schaefer, 509 U.S. 292 (U.S. 1993) 4. The commissioner was not substantially justified. As the U. S. Supreme Court has held, "the required'not substantially justified’ allegation imposes no proof burden on the fee applicant. It is, as its text conveys, nothing more than an allegation or pleading requirement. The burden of establishing'that the position of the United States was substantially justified’ … must be shouldered by the Government." Scarborough v. Principi, 541 U. S. 401, 414 (2004). While the fee applicant such as Plaintiff is required to "show" three of the four elements—prevailing party status, financial eligibility, and amount sought—Plaintiff need only "to allege" that the position of the government is not substantially justified. Id. WHEREFORE, because all four elements of an allowable application for EAJA fees have been proven or alleged, petitioner humbly prays that the Court issue an order: Case 4:16-cv-00030-HRH Document 21-7 Filed 06/29/17 Page 2 of 3 1. Awarding an Equal Access to Justice Act Counsel Fee for $5,472.86; and 2. If the Plaintiff has no debt registered with the Department of Treasury subject to offset that the fees be made payable to the attorney; and 3. Awarding Expenses in the amount of $18.66. I declare under the penalty of perjury that the foregoing is true and correct. Executed this June 29, 2017 Respectfully submitted,/s/Howard D. Olinsky Howard D. Olinsky New York Bar # 2044865 Attorney for Plaintiff Admitted Pro Hac Vice Olinsky Law Group One Park Place 300 South State Street, Suite 420 Syracuse, New York 13202 Phone: (315) 701-5780 Email: fedctgroup@windisability.com To: Joseph J. Langkamer, Esq. Special Assistant United States Attorney Office of the General Counsel Social Security Administration 701 Fifth Avenue, Suite 2900 M/S 221A Seattle, WA 98104-7075 Telephone: (206) 615-2212 Fax: (206) 615-2531 Email:joseph.langkamer@ssa.gov Case 4:16-cv-00030-HRH Document 21-7 Filed 06/29/17 Page 3 of 3

Certificate of Service

HOWARD D. OLINSKY, Esq. New York No. 2044865 Attorney for Plaintiff Admitted Pro Hac Vice Olinsky Law Group One Park Place 300 South State Street, Suite 420 Syracuse, New York 13202 Telephone: (315) 701-5780 Fax: (315) 701-5781 Email: fedct@windisability.com UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT DISTRICT OF ALASKA MARY F. ZWOLLE, Plaintiff, Civil Action No. 4:16-CV-00030-HRH-v-COMMISSIONER OF SOCIAL SECURITY, Defendant.-----------------------------------------------------------CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE I certify that I have electronically moved for EAJA fees with the Clerk of the District Court using the CM/ECF system, which sent notification of such filing to: To: Joseph J. Langkamer, Esq. Special Assistant United States Attorney Office of the General Counsel Social Security Administration 701 Fifth Avenue, Suite 2900 M/S 221A Seattle, WA 98104-7075 Telephone: (206) 615-2212 Fax: (206) 615-2531 Email:joseph.langkamer@ssa.gov June 29, 2017/s/Howard D. Olinsky Howard D. Olinsky, Esq. Case 4:16-cv-00030-HRH Document 21-8 Filed 06/29/17 Page 1 of 1

RESPONSE in Opposition re [20] First MOTION for Attorney Fees Pursuant to the Equal Access to Justice Act, 28 U.S.C Sect. 2412 filed by Nancy A. Berryhill.

1 BRYAN SCHRODER 2 United States Attorney RICHARD L. POMEROY 3 Assistant United States Attorney Federal Bldg & U.S. Courthouse 4 222 W 7th Ave, #9, Rm C-253 Anchorage, AK 99513-7676 5 Telephone: (907) 271-5071 Fax: (907) 271-2344 6 richard.pomeroy@usdoj.gov 7 JOSEPH J. LANGKAMER Special Assistant United States Attorney 8 Office of the General Counsel Social Security Administration 9 701 Fifth Avenue, Suite 2900 M/S 221A Seattle, WA 98104-7075 10 Telephone: (206) 615-2212 Fax: (206) 615-2531 11 joseph.langkamer@ssa.gov 12 Of Attorneys for Defendant 13 IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE 14 DISTRICT OF ALASKA 15 MARY F. ZWOLLE, Case No. 4:16-cv-00030-HRH 16 Plaintiff, 17 DEFENDANT’S RESPONSE TO vs. PLAINTIFF’S MOTION FOR ATTORNEY 18 FEES NANCY A. BERRYHILL, 19 Acting Commissioner of Social Security, 20 Defendant. 21 INTRODUCTION 22 The Commissioner opposes Plaintiff’s request for attorney fees under the Equal Access to 23 Justice Act (EAJA). See ECF Nos. 20-21. Although the Court ultimately remanded this case, the Page 1 DEFENDANT’S RESPONSE TO PLAINTIFF’S MOTION FOR ATTORNEY FEES-[4:16-cv-00030-HRH] Case 4:16-cv-00030-HRH Document 22 Filed 07/13/17 Page 1 of 5 1 Commissioner’s position nevertheless was substantially justified. Therefore, the Court should 2 deny Plaintiff’s motion for EAJA fees. 3 ARGUMENT 4 Under the EAJA, a court may "award attorneys’ fees, court costs, and other expenses 5 when a party prevails against the United States." Hardisty v. Astrue, 592 F.3d 1072, 1076 (9th 6 Cir. 2010). However, attorneys’ fees are not automatically awarded to the prevailing party. 7 Allen-Howard v. Astrue, No. 11-1116, 2013 WL 486665, at *1 (D. Or. Feb. 5, 2013) (citing 8 Fed. Election Comm’n v. Rose, 806 F.2d 1081, 1090 (D.C. Cir. 1986)). Instead, a court should 9 disallow a prevailing party from recovering fees where the government’s position was 10 "substantially justified." 28 U.S.C. § 2412(d)(1)(A). 11 To that end, the fact that a claimant prevails "does not raise a presumption that [the 12 government’s] position was not substantially justified." Kali v. Bowen, 854 F.2d 329, 334 (9th 13 Cir. 1988). The government’s position "can be justified even though it is not correct." Pierce 14 v. Underwood, 487 U.S. 552, 556 n.2 (1988). A substantially justified position "only requires 15 justification to a degree that could satisfy a reasonable person." Ibrahim v. U.S. Dep’t of 16 Homeland Sec., 835 F.3d 1048, 1056 (9th Cir. 2016) (internal quotations omitted). Therefore, a 17 court should deny EAJA fees if the government’s position had "a reasonable basis in law and 18 fact." Pierce, 487 U.S. at 556 n.2. 19 The Court remanded this case because the ALJ rejected the opinion of Mr. Pasek, a 20 physical therapist. ECF No. 16 at 9-10. Notably, the Court did not find problems with the ALJ’s 21 reasons for discounting this opinion. Id. at 9. Instead, the Court determined that, because the 22 ALJ discounted this opinion, he impermissibly interpreted medical evidence in fashioning 23 Plaintiff’s residual functional capacity (RFC). Id. at 9-10. Nevertheless, the Commissioner’s Page 2 DEFENDANT’S RESPONSE TO PLAINTIFF’S MOTION FOR ATTORNEY FEES-[4:16-cv-00030-HRH] Case 4:16-cv-00030-HRH Document 22 Filed 07/13/17 Page 2 of 5 1 position in favor of affirmance was substantially justified. 2 While the Court cited a couple district court cases in support of its opinion, the Ninth 3 Circuit has stated that an ALJ is "responsible for translating and incorporating clinical findings 4 into a succinct RFC." Rounds v. Comm’r Soc. Sec. Admin., 807 F.3d 996, 1006 (9th Cir. 2015). 5 The Rounds case aligns with 20 C.F.R. § 404.1546(c), which directs that an ALJ "is responsible 6 for assessing [a claimant’s] residual functional capacity." Similarly, Social Security Ruling 96-5p 7 reiterates that an RFC finding is reserved to the Commissioner, and is based "upon consideration 8 of all relevant evidence in the case record, including medical evidence." SSR 96-5p, available at 9 1996 WL 374193, at *5. 10 Here, as the Commissioner reasonably argued, the ALJ did not play doctor; rather, he 11 applied the directive in Rounds, 20 C.F.R. § 404.1546(c), and SSR 96-5, which required him to 12 review all of the medical evidence, as well as the rest of the record, and make an RFC finding. 13 See, e.g., Castle v. Colvin, 557 F. App’x 849, 853 (11th Cir. 2014) ("the ALJ did not'play doctor’ 14 in assessing [claimant’s] RFC, but instead properly carried out his regulatory role as an 15 adjudicator responsible for assessing [claimant’s] RFC"). As the ALJ explained, "[i]n reaching 16 the conclusion that the claimant is limited to light work,... I considered the claimant’s subjective 17 allegations; the objective medical evidence; any evidence related to daily activities; the duration, 18 frequency, and intensity of alleged symptoms; the dosage and effectiveness of medication; 19 precipitating and aggravating factors; and functional restrictions." Tr. 18. 20 Over the course of four pages, the ALJ reviewed Plaintiff’s subjective complaints, the 21 objective medical evidence, and the opinion evidence; weighed this evidence and made factual 22 findings about Plaintiff’s functional abilities; and then captured Plaintiff’s limitations in his RFC 23 finding. Tr. 15-18. Although the Court raised a concern that the ALJ evaluated the medical Page 3 DEFENDANT’S RESPONSE TO PLAINTIFF’S MOTION FOR ATTORNEY FEES-[4:16-cv-00030-HRH] Case 4:16-cv-00030-HRH Document 22 Filed 07/13/17 Page 3 of 5 1 evidence in the context of assessing Plaintiff’s credibility, ECF No. 16 at 10, the ALJ assessed 2 Plaintiff’s credibility in the context of fashioning her RFC. Tr. 14-18. At bottom, the ALJ 3 "translat[ed] and incorporate[ed] clinical findings into a succinct RFC." Rounds, 807 F.3d at 4 1006. He also reviewed the other record evidence and factored that into the RFC, as well. The 5 Commissioner’s position was substantially justified. 6 CONCLUSION 7 The Commissioner’s position was justified "to a degree that could satisfy a reasonable 8 person." Ibrahim, 835 F.3d at 1056 (internal quotations omitted). Therefore, the Commissioner 9 requests the Court to deny Plaintiff’s motion for EAJA fees. 10 DATED this 13th day of July 2017. 11 Respectfully submitted, 12 BRYAN SCHRODER 13 United States Attorney 14 RICHARD L. POMEROY Assistant United States Attorney 15 MATHEW W. PILE 16 Acting Regional Chief Counsel, Seattle, Region X 17 s/Joseph J. Langkamer JOSEPH J. LANGKAMER 18 Special Assistant United States Attorney Office of the General Counsel 19 Social Security Administration 701 Fifth Avenue, Suite 2900 M/S 221A 20 Seattle, WA 98104-7075 Telephone: (206) 615-2212, 21 Fax: (206) 615-2531 joseph.langkamer@ssa.gov 22 23 Page 4 DEFENDANT’S RESPONSE TO PLAINTIFF’S MOTION FOR ATTORNEY FEES-[4:16-cv-00030-HRH] Case 4:16-cv-00030-HRH Document 22 Filed 07/13/17 Page 4 of 5 1 CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE 2 I hereby certify that the foregoing Defendant’s Response to Plaintiff’s Motion for 3 Attorney Fees was filed with the Clerk of the Court on July 13, 2017, using the CM/ECF system, 4 which will send notification of such filing to the following: Howard D. Olinsky. 5 6 s/Joseph J. Langkamer JOSEPH J. LANGKAMER 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 Page 5 DEFENDANT’S RESPONSE TO PLAINTIFF’S MOTION FOR ATTORNEY FEES-[4:16-cv-00030-HRH] Case 4:16-cv-00030-HRH Document 22 Filed 07/13/17 Page 5 of 5

Consent MOTION for Extension of Time to File Response/Reply as to [22] Response in Opposition to Motion Unopposed by Mary F. Zwolle.

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT DISTRICT OF ALASKA MARY F. ZWOLLE, Plaintiff, CIVIL ACTION NO. 4:16-cv-00030-HRH-v-CAROLYN W. COLVIN, ACTING COMMISSIONER OF SOCIAL SECURITY, Defendant.-----------------------------------------------------------Through her attorneys, Mary Zwolle moves for an extension of time of seven days, from July 20, 2017 to July 27, 2017, to file her reply brief in support of her motion for attorney fees. The reason for this request is multiple simultaneous deadlines today making us unable to fully research and brief the complex issue of substantial justification Defendant presents. Counsel contacted agency counsel and this Motion is unopposed. A proposed Order is attached hereto for the Court’s consideration This 20th day of July 2017. s/Howard Olinsky Attorney for Plaintiff Pro hac vice Olinsky Law Group One Park Place 300 South State Street Syracuse, New York 13202 Telephone: (315) 701-5780 Fax: (315) 701-5781 holinsky@windisability.com Case 4:16-cv-00030-HRH Document 23 Filed 07/20/17 Page 1 of 2 Certificate of Service I certify that this Unopposed Motion for extension of time was served this date on counterpart counsel by CM/ECF system, which distributes Notice of Electronic Filing to Registered Users./s/Howard Olinsky Case 4:16-cv-00030-HRH Document 23 Filed 07/20/17 Page 2 of 2

Proposed Order

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE DISTRICT OF ALASKA MARY F. ZWOLLE, Plaintiff, v. NANCY A. BERRYHILL, Acting Commissioner of Social Security, Defendant. Case No. 4:16-cv-00030-HRH ORDER RE MOTION FOR EXTENSION Upon consideration of Plaintiff’s Consent Motion for Extension of Time (Docket 20), the Court hereby GRANTS the motion. IT IS ORDERED that Plaintiff shall file her reply brief in this matter on or before July 27, 2017. DATED this______ day of July, 2017 at Anchorage, Alaska. H. Russel Holland UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE Case 4:16-cv-00030-HRH Document 23-1 Filed 07/20/17 Page 1 of 1

REPLY to Response to Motion re [20] First MOTION for Attorney Fees Pursuant to the Equal Access to Justice Act, 28 U.S.C Sect. 2412 Please strike document if extension request to file this reply is not granted. filed by Mary F. Zwolle.

1 2 Howard D. Olinsky Admitted pro hac vice 3 holinsky@windisability.com 4 Olinsky Law Group 5 300 South State Street, Suite 420 Syracuse, New York 13202 6 Tel 315 701 5780 fax 701 5781 7 Attorney for Plaintiff 8 9 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 10 FOR THE DISTRICT OF ALASKA 11 12 MARY F. ZWOLLE, CASE NO.: 4:16-CV-00030-HRH Plaintiff, 13 14-v-15 16 NANCY A. BERRYHILL, 17 ACTING COMMISSIONER OF SOCIAL SECURITY, Defendant. 18 19 __________________________________________________________________ 20 PLAINTIFF’S REPLY MEMORANDUM OF LAW OF POINTS AND 21 AUTHORITIES IN SUPPORT OF MOTION FOR ATTORNEY FEES 22 Defendant makes one challenge to Plaintiff’s Equal Access to Justice Act 28 U.S.C. § 23 2412(d)(1)(A) fee petition. She argues the Commissioner’s position was substantially justified. 24 She does not argue the amount requested is unreasonable nor does she argue she is the prevailing 25 party. 26 27 1. The Commissioner’s Position Was Not Substantially Justified 28 1 Case 4:16-cv-00030-HRH Document 24 Filed 07/27/17 Page 1 of 5 1'"Substantial justification under the EAJA means that the government’s position must 2 have a reasonable basis in law and fact."’ Shafer v. Astrue, 518 F.3d 1067, 1071 (9th Cir. 2008) 3 (quoting Corbin v. Apfel, 149 F.3d 1051, 1052 (9th Cir. 1998) (internal quotations and citations 4 5 omitted)).'"The government’s position must be substantially justified at each stage of the 6 proceedings."’ Shafer, 518 F.3d at 1071 (quoting Corbin, 149 F.3d at 1052). 7 The EAJA provides that "a court shall award to a prevailing party... fees and other expenses... 8 incurred by that party in any civil action... brought by or against the United States... unless the 9 court finds that the position of the United States was substantially justified or that special 10 11 circumstances make an award unjust." 28 U.S.C. § 2412(d)(1)(A). See also Gisbrecht v. 12 Barnhart, 535 U.S. 789, 796 (2002). "It is the government's burden to show that its position was 13 substantially justified or that special circumstances exist to make an award unjust." Gutierrez v. 14 Barnhart, 274 F.3d 1255, 1258 (9th Cir. 2001). Where an ALJ selectively considers the 15 evidence, the Commissioner’s decision to defend the ALJ’s denial of benefits is without 16 17 substantial justification. Flores v. Shalala, 49 F.3d 562, 570 (9th Cir. 1995).'"It will only be a 18 decidedly unusual case in which there is substantial justification under the EAJA even though the 19 agency’s decision was reversed as lacking in reasonable, substantial and probative evidence in 20 the record."’ Meier v. Colvin, 727 F.2d 867, 872 (9th Cir. 2013) (quoting Al-Harbi v. INS, 284 21 22 F.3d 1080, 1085 (9th Cir. 2002)). 23 In this case, the Court remanded because the ALJ guessed at Plaintiff’s RFC, leaving the 24 RFC without substantial evidence support. Indeed, the Court found that "[a] remand for further 25 proceedings is appropriate here because the record needs to be developed more fully.... What 26 is missing is a functional assessment by an accepted medical source for the relevant time period." 27 28 2 Case 4:16-cv-00030-HRH Document 24 Filed 07/27/17 Page 2 of 5 1 Order at 11. Here, the agency’s decision was reversed as there was not reasonable, substantial, 2 or probative evidence support the RFC determination. Meier, 727 F.2d at 872. Contrary to the 3 Commissioner’s argument, Plaintiff understands that it is the ALJ’s duty to fashion the RFC. We 4 5 are not asserting, as the Commissioner often argues, that the RFC must be tied to any particular 6 opinion. Plaintiff instead argues that there must be an appropriate basis for the RFC that the ALJ 7 fashions. Indeed, district courts within the Ninth Circuit consistently remand on this issue of the 8 ALJ relying on raw medical data and translating it into functional terms, as they should, because 9 these courts understand that while the RFC need not correlate with any specific medical opinion, 10 11 it still must have expert guidance on functional limitations based upon evidence, something the 12 ALJ is simply not trained or qualified to do. The Commissioner cannot be said to be 13 substantially justified when an RFC is fashioned out of thin air, as there is clearly no substantial 14 evidence support for that RFC. Social Security has developed an entire scheme of regulations as 15 to how opinion evidence should be weighed. See e.g. 20 C.F.R. § 404.1527(c). This is why they 16 17 have non-examining State agency review physicians, and send claimants to consultative 18 examinations. It should be obvious to the Commissioner that while the ALJ has the ultimate 19 duty to develop the RFC, these regulations are in place so that RFC may be supported by 20 substantial evidence. 21 22 Further, the Commissioner’s position cannot be substantially justified here because the 23 RFC has no reasonable basis in fact as it relied on the ALJ playing doctor. There is no factual 24 basis that allows the ALJ to opine as to limitations based on the raw medical data, he is not a 25 doctor. The formulation of an RFC based upon raw medical data could never be a simple 26 articulation error, because the ALJ as a lay person, could never on remand correct or further 27 28 3 Case 4:16-cv-00030-HRH Document 24 Filed 07/27/17 Page 3 of 5 1 explain as to how raw medical data translates into functional terms given they do not have 2 medical degrees. As the Court notes here, the record needs development so the ALJ can fashion a 3 supported RFC. It was not reasonable for the ALJ to rely on raw medical data, nor was it 4 5 reasonable for the Commissioner to defend such an obvious and harmful error denying disability 6 based upon an RFC that had no substantial evidence support. 7 The RFC in this case is simply not supported by evidence that allows the ALJ to turn raw 8 data into functional terms. The record required further development as the ALJ selectively chose 9 evidence and guessed at an RFC without substantial evidence support. There was no reasonable, 10 11 substantial, or probative support for the RFC determination in this case. Meier, 727 F.2d at 872. 12 As such, the Commissioner’s position was not substantially justified. 13 14 CONCLUSION 15 For the forgoing reasons, and the reasons in Plaintiff’s petition for attorney fees it is 16 17 respectfully requested that the Court grant attorney fees in total. 18 Respectfully submitted, 19/s/Howard D. Olinsky 20 Howard D. Olinsky, Esq. 21 (Admitted Pro Hac Vice) Attorney for Plaintiff 22 Olinsky Law Group 23 One Park Place, 300 South State Street Syracuse, New York 13202 24 Tel: (315) 701-5780 25 Email: holinsky@windisability.com 26 27 28 4 Case 4:16-cv-00030-HRH Document 24 Filed 07/27/17 Page 4 of 5 1 2 Certificate of Service 3 Service was effected by the CM/ECF system that sent Notice of Electronic Filing to registered 4 users. Counsel for the agency is a registered user of CMECF and was served by NEF. The 5 documents served were this reply brief. 6 7/s/Howard D. Olinsky 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 5 Case 4:16-cv-00030-HRH Document 24 Filed 07/27/17 Page 5 of 5

ORDER approving [23] Motion for Extension of Time re [20] First MOTION for Attorney Fees Pursuant to the Equal Access to Justice Act, 28 U.S.C Sect. 2412. Replies due by 7/27/2017.

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE DISTRICT OF ALASKA NANCY A. BERRYHILL, Acting MARY F. ZWOLLE v. Commissioner of Social Security JUDGE H. RUSSEL HOLLAND CASE NO. 4:16-cv-0030-HRH PROCEEDINGS: ORDER FROM CHAMBERS Plaintiff’s Consent Motion for Extension of Time1 is approved. Plaintiff shall file her reply brief in this matter on or before July 27, 2017. 1 Docket No. 23. Order from Chambers – Extension of Time-1-Case 4:16-cv-00030-HRH Document 25 Filed 07/27/17 Page 1 of 1

ORDER granting [20] Motion for Attorney Fees. Attorney fees, expenses, and costs in the total amount of $5,491.52 are awarded to the Plaintiff. Signed by Judge H. Russel Holland on 8/2/17.

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE DISTRICT OF ALASKA MARY F. ZWOLLE,)) Plaintiff,)) vs.)) NANCY A. BERRYHILL, Acting) Commissioner of Social Security,) No. 4:16-cv-0030-HRH) Defendant.) _______________________________________) ORDER Motion for Attorney Fees1 Plaintiff moves for an award of attorney fees pursuant to the Equal Access to Justice Act, 28 U.S.C. § 2412. The motion is opposed.2 Oral argument has not been requested and is not deemed necessary. Defendant does not question the amount of fees or costs sought by plaintiff. Rather, defendant would have the court determine that the Commissioner’s position was justified, and that attorney fees should be denied. Based upon the parties’ briefs, the court reversed the decision of the ALJ and remanded the matter for further proceedings – in particular for the completion of the development of the record. As the matter came to the court, there was lacking a functional assessment of plaintiff’s condition by an accepted medical source. The ALJ 1 Docket No. 20. 2 Docket No. 22. Order – Motion for Attorney Fees-1-Case 4:16-cv-00030-HRH Document 26 Filed 08/02/17 Page 1 of 2 failed to obtain expert guidance as to plaintiff’s functional limitations based upon the medical record. The court concludes that the defendant’s position was not substantially justified, and plaintiff’s motion for attorney fees is therefore granted pursuant to the Equal Access to Justice Act, 28 U.S.C. § 2412(d). Accordingly, IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that attorney fees, expenses, and costs in the total amount of Five Thousand Four Hundred Ninety-One Dollars and Fifty-Two Cents ($5,491.52) pursuant to the Equal Access to Justice Act, 28 U.S.C. § 2412(d) are awarded to plaintiff. Astrue v. Ratliff, 130 S.Ct. 2521 (2010). The court hereby awards EAJA fees, broken down as follows: (1) Plaintiff is awarded $5,472.86 for attorney fees and paralegal fees under 28 U.S.C. § 2412(d); (2) Plaintiff is awarded $18.66 in expenses for certified mail for service of the summons and complaint. If the U.S. Department of the Treasury determines that plaintiff’s EAJA fees, expenses, and costs are not subject to offset allowed under the Department of the Treasury’s Offset Program (TOPS), then the check for EAJA fees, expenses, and costs shall be made payable to plaintiff’s attorney, Paul Eaglin. Whether the check is made payable to plaintiff or to Paul Eaglin, the check shall be mailed to the Olinsky Law Group at the following address: 300 South State Street – Suite 420 Syracuse, NY 13202 DATED at Anchorage, Alaska, this 2nd day of August, 2017./s/H. Russel Holland United States District Judge Order – Motion for Attorney Fees-2-Case 4:16-cv-00030-HRH Document 26 Filed 08/02/17 Page 2 of 2

Interested in this case?

Sign up to receive real-time updates
Last full docket sheet refresh: 549 days ago. Refresh now
#
Datesort arrow up
Description
1
09/28/2016
COMPLAINT against Carolyn W. Colvin, filed by Mary F. Zwolle.
1
Exhibit A
1 Attachment
2
09/28/2016
Civil Cover Sheet
3
09/28/2016
MOTION for Leave to Proceed in forma pauperis by Mary F. Zwolle.
4
09/28/2016
Unissued summons re Defendant Carolyn W. Colvin
1
Unissued Summons re Defendant US Attorney General
2
Unissued Summons re Defendant US Attorney
2 Attachments
5
09/29/2016
ORDER granting 3 Motion for Leave to Proceed IFP; svc to be completed w/I 90 days from filing of cmplt, def has 60 days after receipt of sums & cmplt to respond. Signed by Judge H. Russel Holland on 9/29/16. cc: Finance
09/29/2016
Summons Issued as to Carolyn W. Colvin, U.S. Attorney and U.S. Attorney General (Text entry; no document attached.)
6
10/17/2016
NOTICE of Appearance by Joseph John Langkamer on behalf of Carolyn W. Colvin
7
10/19/2016
SUMMONS Returned Executed by Mary F. Zwolle. Carolyn W. Colvin served on 10/13/2016, answer due 12/12/2016.
8
10/25/2016
SOCIAL SECURITY SCHEDULING ORDER. Signed by Judge H. Russel Holland on 10/25/2016. Modified on 1/26/2017 to create relationship to document #14
10/25/2016
Docket Annotation: For the purpose of tracking the briefing as ordered at docket 8, when filing the Opening Brief the attorney shall file the document using the event Motion Miscellaneous Relief and text in the relief being sought. Responsive filings should be filed using the event Response in Opposition to Motion or Response to Motion (Non-Opposition). The reply, if any, shall be filed using the event Reply to Response to Motion. (Text entry; no document attached.)
9
11/28/2016
NOTICE of Appearance by Richard L. Pomeroy on behalf of Carolyn W. Colvin
10
12/12/2016
ANSWER to 1 Complaint by Carolyn W. Colvin.
11
12/12/2016
Notice of Lodging Administrative Record
1
Certification Page
2
Court Transcript Index
3
Documents Related to Administrative Process Including Transcript of Oral Hearing, if applicable
4
Payment Documents and Decisions
5
Jurisdictional Documents and Notices
6
Non Disability Related Development
7
Disability Related Development
8
Medical Records Part 1
9
Medical Records Part 2
9 Attachments
12
01/11/2017
Consent MOTION for Extension of Time to File Memo of Law Soc Sec appeal UNOPPOSED by Mary F. Zwolle.
1
Proposed Order
1 Attachment
13
01/12/2017
ORDER granting 12 Motion for Extension of Time to File Opening Brief; brf due 1/25/17.
14
01/25/2017
MOTION to Remand by Mary F. Zwolle.
02/23/2017
Docket Annotation: Nancy A. Berryhill; Acting Commissioner of Social Security, represented by Joseph Langkamer & Richard Pomeroy substituted for Carolyn W. Colvin (acting Commissioner of Social Security) pursuant to FRCvP 25(d)(1). (Text entry; no document attached.)
15
02/24/2017
RESPONSE in Opposition re 14 MOTION to Remand filed by Nancy A. Berryhill.
16
04/06/2017
ORDER that Commissioner's decision reversed; matter remanded for further proceedings. Signed by Judge H. Russel Holland on 4/6/17.
17
04/07/2017
JUDGMENT that Commissioner's decision is reversed; matter remanded for further proceedings. Signed by Judge H. Russel Holland on 4/7/17. (Additional attachment(s) added on 8/2/2017: # (1) Judgment with attorney fees and costs-redistributed)
18
04/20/2017
MOTION for Leave to Appear as Pro Hac Vice (Non-Resident) Attorney Howard D. Olinsky. (Pro Hac Vice Admission fee $150.00 paid. Receipt number 097--2318829.) by Mary F. Zwolle.
1
Certificate of Good Standing
1 Attachment
19
04/24/2017
ORDER granting [18] Application of Non-Resident Attorney
20
06/29/2017
First MOTION for Attorney Fees Pursuant to the Equal Access to Justice Act, 28 U.S.C Sect. 2412 by Mary F. Zwolle.
1
Proposed Order
1 Attachment
21
06/29/2017
DECLARATION of Howard D. Olinsky, Esq. re [20] First MOTION for Attorney Fees Pursuant to the Equal Access to Justice Act, 28 U.S.C Sect. 2412 by Mary F. Zwolle.
1
Exhibit A All Professional Time
2
Exhibit B Attorney Time
3
Exhibit C Paralegal Time
4
Exhibit D Expenses
5
Exhibit E Fee Agreement
6
Exhibit F Affirmation and Waiver of Direct Payment of EAJA Fees
7
Memorandum In Support
8
Certificate of Service
8 Attachments
22
07/13/2017
RESPONSE in Opposition re [20] First MOTION for Attorney Fees Pursuant to the Equal Access to Justice Act, 28 U.S.C Sect. 2412 filed by Nancy A. Berryhill.
23
07/20/2017
Consent MOTION for Extension of Time to File Response/Reply as to [22] Response in Opposition to Motion Unopposed by Mary F. Zwolle.
1
Proposed Order
1 Attachment
24
07/27/2017
REPLY to Response to Motion re [20] First MOTION for Attorney Fees Pursuant to the Equal Access to Justice Act, 28 U.S.C Sect. 2412 Please strike document if extension request to file this reply is not granted. filed by Mary F. Zwolle.
25
07/27/2017
ORDER approving [23] Motion for Extension of Time re [20] First MOTION for Attorney Fees Pursuant to the Equal Access to Justice Act, 28 U.S.C Sect. 2412. Replies due by 7/27/2017.
26
08/02/2017
ORDER granting [20] Motion for Attorney Fees. Attorney fees, expenses, and costs in the total amount of $5,491.52 are awarded to the Plaintiff. Signed by Judge H. Russel Holland on 8/2/17.
Would you like this case removed from DocketBird? Request removal.