EAJA Fee Victory in Seattle: Abdur-Rahman v. Napolitano

"[R]etroactively placing plaintiffs in unlawful status impermissibly sanctioned them for behavior that was not deemed unlawful when it occurred, a trap that “is hardly worthy of our great government.” ... The Court cannot find that the government’s position on this matter was “substantially justified.” ... One need only read the Court’s two opinions in these proceedings to conclude that the agency’s enforcement efforts here were not only overly “vigorous” but misplaced, leading ultimately to a denial of due process. The Court accordingly finds no special circumstances which would make an award of fees unjust. ... Plaintiffs have presented sufficient evidence to establish that they possess the distinctive knowledge and specialized skill necessary to achieve success in this complex case, and that such assistance would not have been available at the standard un-enhanced EAJA rates. ... The declaration of Marc Van Der Hout in particular establishes that work of this caliber could not have been obtained at the EAJA statutory rates. ... The Clerk shall enter judgment in favor of plaintiffs in the amount of $86,110.47." - Abdur-Rahman v. Napolitano, June 13, 2012.

Hats off to Devin T. Theriot-Orr!