CBCA 5237-C(3562)
Board: CBCA
Agency: General Services Administration
Appellant: Paradise Pillow, Inc.
Date: 2017-01-18
Outcome: granted
GRANTED: January 18, 2017
CBCA 5237-C(3562)
PARADISE PILLOW, INC.,
Applicant,
v.
GENERAL SERVICES ADMINISTRATION,
Respondent.
Daniel A. Bellman of Bellman Law, Granville, OH, counsel for Applicant.
Michael J. Noble, Office of General Counsel, General Services Administration,
Washington, DC, counsel for Respondent.
Before Board Judges DANIELS (Chairman), KULLBERG, and ZISCHKAU.
DANIELS, Board Judge.
The Board granted an appeal by Paradise Pillow, Inc. (Paradise) of the termination for
âdefault/causeâ by a General Services Administration (GSA) contracting officer of a delivery
order for blankets. We converted the termination into one for the convenience of the
Government. Paradise Pillow, Inc. v. General Services Administration, CBCA 3562, 15-1
BCA ¶ 36,153. Within thirty days after the decision became final (because neither party
timely appealed it to the Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit), Paradise filed an
application for reimbursement of attorney fees and expenses incurred in prosecuting the
appeal, totaling $45,636.29.
CBCA 5237-C(3562) 2
The application was filed pursuant to the Equal Access to Justice Act (EAJA),
5 U.S.C. § 504 (2012). The EAJA provides that â
an agency that conducts an adversary adjudication shall award, to a prevailing
party other than the United States, fees and other expenses incurred by that
party in connection with that proceeding, unless the adjudicative officer of the
agency finds that the position of the agency was substantially justified or that
special circumstances make an award unjust.
5 U.S.C. § 504(a)(1). The purpose of the law is âto eliminate the barriers that prohibit small
businesses and individuals from securing vindication of their rights in civil actions and
administrative proceedings brought by or against the Federal Government.â Scarborough
v. Principi, 541 U.S. 401, 406 (2004) (quoting H.R. Rep. No. 96-1005, at 9 (1980)).
To be eligible under this Act for recovery of fees and other expenses incurred in
connection with a proceeding, an applicant must meet several requirements. It must:
(1) have been a prevailing party in a proceeding against the United States;
(2) if a corporation, have had not more than $7,000,000 in net worth and five
hundred employees at the time the adversary adjudication was initiated;
(3) submit its application within thirty days of a final disposition in the
adjudication;
(4) in that application, (a) show that it has met the requirements as to having
prevailed and size (numbers (1) and (2) above) and (b) state the amount sought
and include an itemized statement of costs and attorney fees; and
(5) allege that the position of the agency was not substantially justified.
5 U.S.C. § 504(a)(1), (2), (b)(1)(B); see Doty v. United States, 71 F.3d 384, 385 (Fed. Cir.
1995); Russell Sand & Gravel Co. v. International Boundary & Water Commission, CBCA
3781-C(2235), 14-1 BCA ¶ 35,615, at 174,443.
In its application, Paradise, with supporting documentation, has met each of these
requirements. The applicant made its calculation of attorney fees by multiplying hours
expended by its lawyer by $125 per hour, the maximum rate allowed by the EAJA, save for
exceptions not relevant here. See 5 U.S.C. § 504(b)(1)(A). The number of hours devoted
to the appeal by the lawyer appears reasonable.
CBCA 5237-C(3562) 3
GSAâs response to the application states in full:
GSA does not dispute Paradise Pillowâs . . . fee petition in terms of Paradise
Pillow meeting the EAJA eligibility requirements, its status as a prevailing
party, the sufficiency of its billing records, and/or its overall entitlement to the
attorney fees and costs/expenses otherwise sought in that petition.
Decision
We GRANT the application. The General Services Administration shall pay
$45,636.29 to Paradise Pillow, Inc. This sum shall be paid âfrom any funds made available
to the agency by appropriation or otherwise.â 5 U.S.C. § 504(d).
_________________________
STEPHEN M. DANIELS
Board Judge
We concur:
_________________________ _________________________
H.