scarborough
principi
secretary
veterans
affairs
argued
february
decided
may
equal
access
justice
act
eaja
authorizes
payment
attorney
fees
prevailing
party
action
absent
showing
government
position
underlying
litigation
substantially
justified
section
sets
deadline
days
final
judgment
filing
fee
application
directs
application
include
showing
applicant
prevailing
party
showing
applicant
eligible
receive
award
statement
amount
sought
including
itemized
statement
attorney
stating
actual
time
expended
rate
charged
section
second
sentence
requires
applicant
allege
position
substantially
justified
petitioner
scarborough
prevailed
appeals
veterans
claims
cavc
action
disability
benefits
respondent
secretary
veterans
affairs
scarborough
counsel
filed
timely
application
attorney
fees
costs
pursuant
showing
scarborough
prevailing
party
underlying
litigation
eligible
receive
award
counsel
also
stated
total
amount
sought
itemized
hours
rates
work
counsel
failed
initially
allege
addition
position
substantially
justified
secretary
moved
dismiss
application
ground
cavc
lacked
jurisdiction
award
fees
scarborough
counsel
failed
make
required
allegation
scarborough
counsel
immediately
filed
amended
application
adding
allegation
interim
initial
filing
amendment
however
fee
application
filing
period
expired
sole
reason
cavc
dismissed
scarborough
fee
application
affirming
federal
circuit
initially
held
eaja
plainly
unambiguously
requires
party
seeking
fees
submit
application
including
enumerated
allegations
within
time
limit
granted
certiorari
vacated
judgment
remanded
case
light
edelman
lynchburg
college
edelman
upheld
equal
employment
opportunity
commission
eeoc
regulation
allowing
amendment
employment
discrimination
charge
timely
filed
title
vii
civil
rights
act
add
filing
deadline
required
initially
absent
verification
title
vii
explained
permitted
relation
back
verification
missing
original
filing
remand
federal
circuit
adhered
earlier
decision
distinguishing
edelman
ground
title
vii
remedial
scheme
laypersons
often
initiate
process
whereas
eaja
directed
attorneys
appeals
also
observed
timely
filing
verification
requirements
issue
edelman
appear
separate
statutory
provisions
eaja
filing
deadline
contents
required
fee
application
detailed
statutory
provision
federal
circuit
also
distinguished
holding
becker
montgomery
pro
se
litigant
failure
hand
sign
timely
filed
notice
appeal
nonjurisdictional
therefore
curable
defect
noted
becker
federal
circuit
pointed
timing
signature
requirements
issue
found
separate
rules
held
timely
fee
application
pursuant
may
amended
filing
period
run
cure
initial
failure
allege
government
position
underlying
litigation
lacked
substantial
justification
thus
scarborough
fee
application
amended
qualifies
consideration
determination
merits
pp
whether
scarborough
time
barred
gaining
fee
award
authorized
concern
federal
courts
jurisdiction
rather
concerns
mode
relief
costs
including
legal
fees
ancillary
judgment
plenary
jurisdiction
civil
action
fee
application
made
see
particularly
current
dispute
presents
question
time
issue
whether
require
fee
applicant
allege
position
substantially
justified
clarity
facilitated
courts
litigants
used
label
jurisdictional
rules
prescriptions
delineating
classes
cases
jurisdiction
persons
personal
jurisdiction
falling
within
adjudicatory
authority
kontrick
ryan
slip
section
describe
classes
cases
cavc
competent
adjudicate
relates
postjudgment
proceedings
auxiliary
cases
already
within
adjudicatory
authority
pp
unlike
prescriptions
applicant
must
show
prevailing
party
status
eligib
ility
receive
award
amount
sought
including
itemized
statement
required
substantially
justified
allegation
imposes
proof
burden
fee
applicant
simply
allegation
pleading
requirement
understood
applicant
pleading
burden
akin
becker
signature
requirement
edelman
verification
requirement
like
requirements
eaja
substantially
justified
allegation
think
twice
prescription
stem
urge
litigate
irresponsibly
edelman
time
allegation
functions
shift
burden
government
prove
position
underlying
litigation
substantially
justified
allegation
serve
essential
function
government
aware
moment
fee
application
filed
defeat
application
merits
prove
position
substantially
justified
failure
make
allegation
therefore
fatal
genuine
doubt
exists
applying
fees
judgment
becker
moreover
scarborough
lawyer
statutory
contingent
fee
reduced
dollar
dollar
eaja
award
see
fee
agreements
note
following
allowing
curative
amendment
benefits
complainant
directly
fairly
described
simply
boon
counsel
rejects
government
assertion
regime
codified
federal
rule
civil
procedure
place
context
rule
governs
pleadings
term
encompass
fee
applications
becker
edelman
approved
application
doctrine
notice
appeal
eeoc
discrimination
charge
neither
pleading
federal
rules
moreover
relation
back
invention
federal
rulemakers
applied
doctrine
well
federal
rules
became
effective
see
new
york
central
hudson
river
kinney
thus
doctrine
properly
guides
determination
amended
application
arose
conduct
transaction
occurrence
set
forth
attempted
set
forth
initial
application
fed
rule
civ
proc
pp
rejects
government
argument
waiver
sovereign
immunity
liability
fees
conditioned
fee
applicant
meticulous
compliance
every
requirement
within
days
final
judgment
including
allegation
position
substantially
justified
irwin
department
veterans
affairs
franconia
associates
recognized
limitation
principles
generally
apply
government
way
apply
private
parties
enlightening
issue
government
asserts
unpersuasively
irwin
franconia
bear
case
authorizes
fee
awards
rules
analogue
private
litigation
many
statutes
create
claims
relief
agencies
apply
government
defendants
irwin
reasoning
diminished
instructive
situations
readily
identifiable
equivalent
event
analogous
federal
prevailing
party
statutes
applicable
suits
private
litigants
finally
conclusion
expose
government
unfair
imposition
government
never
argued
prejudiced
scarborough
substantially
justified
allegation
permitted
relate
back
timely
filed
fee
application
moreover
showing
prejudice
preclude
operation
doctrine
first
place
eaja
also
check
section
disallows
fees
special
circumstances
make
award
unjust
pp
reversed
remanded
ginsburg
delivered
opinion
rehnquist
stevens
kennedy
souter
breyer
joined
thomas
filed
dissenting
opinion
scalia
joined
randall
scarborough
petitioner
anthony
principi
secretary
veterans
affairs
writ
certiorari
appeals
federal
circuit
may
justice
ginsburg
delivered
opinion
equal
access
justice
act
eaja
act
departs
general
rule
party
lawsuit
pays
legal
fees
see
alyeska
pipeline
service
wilderness
society
relevant
eaja
authorizes
payment
fees
prevailing
party
action
government
may
defeat
entitlement
showing
position
underlying
litigation
substantially
justified
provision
act
prescribes
timing
content
applications
seeking
fees
authorized
section
specifies
time
filing
application
within
thirty
days
final
judgment
action
sentence
provision
identifies
application
contents
particular
showing
applicant
prevailing
party
meets
financial
eligibility
condition
case
net
worth
exceed
time
action
filed
statement
amount
sought
accompanying
itemization
fee
application
instruction
adds
next
sentence
applicant
shall
also
allege
position
substantially
justified
petitioner
randall
scarborough
prevailing
party
action
department
veterans
affairs
disability
benefits
counsel
filed
timely
application
fees
showing
scarborough
eligib
ility
receive
award
amount
sought
including
required
itemized
statement
counsel
failed
initially
allege
addition
position
substantially
justified
pointing
omission
government
moved
dismiss
fee
application
scarborough
counsel
immediately
filed
amended
application
adding
government
opposition
underlying
claim
benefits
substantially
justified
interim
initial
filing
amendment
however
fee
application
filing
period
expired
sole
reason
appeals
veterans
claims
granted
government
motion
dismiss
application
federal
circuit
affirmed
disposition
scarborough
petition
certiorari
presents
question
may
timely
fee
application
pursuant
amended
filing
period
run
cure
initial
failure
allege
government
position
underlying
litigation
lacked
substantial
justification
hold
curative
amendment
permissible
scarborough
fee
application
amended
qualifies
consideration
determination
merits
congress
enacted
eaja
pub
tit
ii
stat
eliminate
barriers
prohibit
small
businesses
individuals
securing
vindication
rights
civil
actions
administrative
proceedings
brought
federal
government
see
congressional
findings
purposes
stat
note
following
purpose
title
diminish
deterrent
effect
seeking
review
defending
governmental
action
among
reforms
eaja
amended
previously
authorized
courts
award
costs
attorney
fees
expenses
prevailing
parties
civil
litigation
eaja
added
two
new
prescriptions
expressly
authorize
attorney
fee
awards
federal
government
first
made
liable
attorney
fees
expenses
extent
party
liable
common
law
terms
statute
specifically
provides
award
second
rendered
government
liable
prevailing
private
party
attorney
fees
expenses
cases
suit
lie
agency
case
concerns
construction
congress
initially
adopted
trial
period
three
years
pub
congress
substantially
reenacted
measure
time
without
sunset
provision
pub
stat
congress
aim
converting
temporary
measure
permanent
one
ensure
certain
individuals
partnerships
corporations
organizations
deterred
seeking
review
defending
unjustified
governmental
action
expense
involved
section
currently
provides
relevant
part
except
otherwise
specifically
provided
statute
shall
award
prevailing
party
fees
expenses
addition
costs
awarded
pursuant
subsection
incurred
party
civil
action
cases
sounding
tort
brought
jurisdiction
action
unless
finds
position
substantially
justified
special
circumstances
make
award
unjust
party
seeking
award
fees
expenses
shall
within
thirty
days
final
judgment
action
submit
application
fees
expenses
shows
party
prevailing
party
eligible
receive
award
subsection
amount
sought
including
itemized
statement
attorney
expert
witness
stating
actual
time
expended
rate
fees
expenses
computed
party
shall
also
allege
position
substantially
justified
section
thus
entitles
prevailing
party
fees
absent
showing
government
position
underlying
litigation
substantially
justified
sets
deadline
days
final
judgment
filing
fee
application
directs
application
shall
include
showing
applicant
prevailing
party
showing
applicant
eligible
receive
award
scarborough
case
applicant
net
worth
exceed
time
civil
action
filed
statement
amount
sought
together
itemized
account
time
expended
rates
charged
second
sentence
adds
fourth
instruction
requiring
applicant
simply
allege
position
substantially
justified
july
petitioner
scarborough
navy
veteran
prevailed
appeals
veterans
claims
cavc
claim
disability
benefits
app
pet
cert
eleven
days
later
scarborough
counsel
applied
scarborough
behalf
attorney
fees
costs
pursuant
eaja
app
scarborough
gain
fee
recovery
lawyer
statutory
contingent
fee
ordinarily
veteran
benefits
reduced
dollar
dollar
eaja
award
see
federal
courts
administration
act
stat
fee
agreements
note
following
tr
oral
arg
clerk
cavc
returned
scarborough
initial
fee
application
ground
filed
soon
app
cavc
issued
judgment
noting
time
filing
postdecision
motions
expired
scarborough
counsel
filed
second
eaja
application
one
issue
setting
forth
first
application
scarborough
prevailing
party
underlying
litigation
net
worth
exceed
million
description
work
counsel
performed
scarborough
since
counsel
retention
august
application
requested
attorney
fees
costs
scarborough
applications
first
second
failed
allege
position
underlying
litigation
substantially
justified
respects
disputed
scarborough
filings
met
requirements
clerk
cavc
found
application
premature
time
retained
unfiled
time
appeal
cavc
judgment
expired
clerk
filed
fee
application
notified
respondent
secretary
veterans
affairs
response
due
within
days
app
receiving
exhausting
extension
time
respond
secretary
moved
dismiss
fee
application
cavc
lacked
jurisdiction
award
fees
secretary
maintained
scarborough
counsel
failed
allege
within
days
final
judgment
position
substantially
justified
cavc
record
doc
pp
scarborough
counsel
promptly
filed
amendment
fee
application
stating
new
paragraph
government
defense
appellant
claim
substantially
justified
app
simultaneously
scarborough
opposed
secretary
motion
dismiss
urging
omission
initially
plead
substantial
justification
cured
amendment
jurisdictional
defect
cavc
record
doc
pp
june
cavc
dismissed
scarborough
fee
application
ground
asserted
government
scarborough
west
vet
app
per
curiam
later
appeals
federal
circuit
affirmed
eaja
must
construed
strictly
favor
government
appeals
stated
act
effects
partial
waiver
sovereign
immunity
rendering
liable
attorney
fees
government
otherwise
required
pay
view
language
eaja
statute
plain
unambiguous
requires
party
seeking
fees
submit
application
including
enumerated
allegations
within
time
limit
citing
acknowledged
courts
appeals
third
eleventh
circuits
read
require
fee
application
filed
within
days
circuits
allow
later
amendments
perfect
specifications
set
citing
dunn
applicant
need
submit
within
days
itemized
statement
accounting
amount
sought
singleton
apfel
applicant
need
allege
within
days
net
worth
exceed
million
government
position
substantially
justified
federal
circuit
also
distinguished
decision
bazalo
west
held
applicant
may
supplement
eaja
application
cure
initial
failure
show
eligibility
fees
applicant
bazalo
failed
allege
establish
within
period
qualified
party
within
meaning
net
worth
exceed
time
civil
action
filed
bazalo
differed
scarborough
case
appeals
said
bazalo
applicant
essentially
complied
basic
pleading
requirements
simply
needed
fles
details
granted
scarborough
initial
petition
writ
certiorari
vacated
judgment
appeals
remanded
case
light
decision
edelman
lynchburg
college
see
edelman
concerned
equal
employment
opportunity
commission
eeoc
regulation
relating
title
vii
civil
rights
act
regulation
allowed
amendment
employment
discrimination
charge
timely
filed
eeoc
add
filing
deadline
passed
required
initially
absent
verification
see
requiring
charges
writing
oath
affirmation
upheld
regulation
title
vii
explained
line
long
history
practice
permitted
relation
back
verification
missing
original
filing
remand
scarborough
case
federal
circuit
panel
two
three
judges
adhered
panel
unanimous
earlier
decision
distinguished
edelman
unlike
civil
rights
statute
edelman
appeals
majority
said
remedial
scheme
laypersons
often
initiate
process
eaja
directed
attorneys
need
paternalistic
protection
internal
quotation
marks
omitted
federal
circuit
majority
observed
two
requirements
issue
edelman
timely
filing
discrimination
charge
verification
charge
appear
separate
statutory
provisions
contrast
eaja
filing
deadline
contents
required
fee
application
detailed
statutory
provision
majority
also
distinguished
becker
montgomery
held
pro
se
litigant
failure
hand
sign
timely
filed
notice
appeal
nonjurisdictional
therefore
curable
defect
noted
becker
federal
circuit
majority
pointed
timing
signature
requirements
issue
found
separate
rules
see
federal
circuit
opinion
next
distinguished
edelman
verification
requirement
becker
signature
requirement
eaja
requirement
additional
ground
substantial
justification
allegation
pro
forma
requirement
requires
applicant
analyze
case
record
one
portion
basis
award
reiterating
allegation
jurisdictional
federal
circuit
held
scarborough
oncompliance
fatal
dismissed
application
chief
judge
mayer
dissented
allegation
found
akin
verification
requirement
edelman
signature
requirement
becker
addition
pathmarking
edelman
becker
decisions
regarded
case
substantially
case
bazalo
light
eaja
purpose
eliminate
financial
disincentive
defend
unjustified
governmental
action
thereby
deter
chief
judge
mayer
concluded
apparent
congress
intend
eaja
application
process
additional
deterrent
vindication
rights
missing
averment
ibid
granted
certiorari
view
division
opinion
among
circuits
question
whether
eaja
application
may
amended
outside
period
allege
government
position
underlying
litigation
substantially
justified
compare
singleton
reverse
judgment
appeals
ii
clarify
first
question
us
whether
scarborough
time
barred
gaining
fee
award
authorized
concern
federal
courts
jurisdiction
rather
concerns
mode
relief
costs
including
legal
fees
ancillary
judgment
plenary
jurisdiction
civil
action
fee
application
made
see
costs
including
fees
awardable
civil
action
brought
jurisdiction
action
appeals
veterans
claims
shall
exclusive
jurisdiction
review
decisions
board
veterans
appeals
particularly
current
dispute
scarborough
government
presents
question
time
issue
whether
require
fee
applicant
allege
position
substantially
justified
recently
observed
courts
including
occasionally
mis
used
term
describe
emphatic
time
prescriptions
claim
processing
rules
classifying
time
prescriptions
even
rigid
ones
heading
matter
jurisdiction
confounding
clarity
facilitated
courts
litigants
used
label
rules
prescriptions
delineating
classes
cases
jurisdiction
persons
personal
jurisdiction
falling
within
adjudicatory
authority
kontrick
ryan
slip
citation
internal
quotation
marks
brackets
omitted
short
describe
classes
cases
slip
cavc
competent
adjudicate
instead
section
relates
postjudgment
proceedings
auxiliary
cases
already
within
adjudicatory
authority
accordingly
kontrick
indicates
provision
deadline
fee
applications
specifications
properly
typed
jurisdictional
turn
next
reason
congress
required
fee
applicant
allege
government
position
substantially
justified
unlike
prescriptions
applicant
must
show
prevailing
party
status
eligib
ility
receive
award
amount
sought
including
itemized
statement
reporting
actual
time
expended
rate
fees
expenses
computed
required
substantially
justified
allegation
imposes
proof
burden
fee
applicant
text
conveys
nothing
allegation
pleading
requirement
burden
establishing
position
substantially
justified
indicates
courts
uniformly
recognized
must
shouldered
government
see
pierce
underwood
brennan
concurring
part
concurring
judgment
davidson
veneman
lauer
barnhart
libas
ca
fed
see
also
strong
deterrents
contesting
government
action
currently
exis
require
burden
proof
rest
congress
however
want
substantially
justified
standard
read
raise
presumption
government
position
substantially
justified
simply
lost
case
ibid
allocating
burden
pleading
position
substantially
justified
burden
fee
applicant
congress
apparently
sought
dispel
assumption
government
must
pay
fees
time
loses
complementarily
requirement
serves
ward
irresponsible
litigation
unreasonable
capricious
demands
counsel
government
stated
oral
argument
allocating
pleading
burden
fee
applicants
obliges
examine
government
position
make
determination
whether
substantially
justified
tr
oral
arg
see
petitioner
recognizes
purpose
allegation
make
lawyer
think
twice
understood
applicant
burden
plead
government
position
substantially
justified
akin
signature
requirement
becker
oath
affirmation
requirement
edelman
becker
pro
se
litigant
typed
neglected
hand
sign
name
required
federal
rule
civil
procedure
timely
filed
notice
appeal
foman
davis
next
term
edelman
described
decision
becker
allowed
relation
back
late
signature
timely
filed
notice
appeal
edelman
edelman
involved
eeoc
regulation
permitting
title
vii
discrimination
charge
timely
filed
agency
amended
outside
period
include
omitted
required
verification
see
supra
reason
observed
sustaining
regulation
think
relation
back
oath
less
reasonable
relation
back
signature
becker
aimed
stemming
urge
litigate
irresponsibly
becker
edelman
inform
judgment
case
like
signature
verification
requirements
eaja
substantially
justified
allegation
think
twice
prescription
stem
urge
litigate
irresponsibly
edelman
time
allegation
functions
shift
burden
government
prove
position
underlying
litigation
substantially
justified
note
allegation
serve
essential
function
government
aware
moment
fee
application
filed
defeat
application
merits
prove
position
substantially
justified
becker
indicates
lapse
fatal
genuine
doubt
exists
app
lying
fees
judgment
moreover
scarborough
lawyer
statutory
contingent
fee
reduced
dollar
dollar
eaja
award
see
fee
agreements
note
following
allowing
curative
amendment
benefits
complainant
directly
fairly
described
simply
boon
counsel
permitting
amendment
thus
advances
congress
purpose
enacting
eaja
reduce
emphasi
virtually
exclusion
issues
cost
potential
litigation
party
decision
whether
challenge
unjust
governmental
action
government
however
maintains
regime
codified
rule
federal
rules
civil
procedure
place
context
rule
governs
pleadings
term
encompass
fee
applications
brief
respondent
see
fed
rule
civ
proc
permitting
relation
back
amendments
pleadings
claim
defense
asserted
amended
pleading
arose
conduct
transaction
occurrence
set
forth
attempted
set
forth
original
timely
filed
pleading
see
also
rule
enumerating
permitted
pleadings
scarborough
acknowledges
rule
directed
federal
district
pleadings
urges
approved
application
doctrine
analogous
settings
brief
petitioner
recently
related
applied
doctrine
becker
edelman
respectively
notice
appeal
eeoc
discrimination
charge
neither
pleading
federal
rules
government
concedes
moreover
see
tr
oral
arg
relation
back
invention
federal
rulemakers
applied
doctrine
well
year
federal
rules
became
effective
see
new
york
central
hudson
river
kinney
seaboard
air
line
renn
missouri
wulf
view
practice
original
rules
advisory
committee
described
relation
back
well
recognized
doctrine
advisory
committee
note
subd
fed
rule
civ
proc
commentators
observed
doctrine
rule
embraces
roots
former
federal
equity
practice
number
state
codes
wright
miller
kane
federal
practice
procedure
ed
doctrine
accordingly
hold
properly
guides
determination
scarborough
fee
application
amended
filing
period
include
substantially
justified
allegation
amended
application
arose
conduct
transaction
occurrence
set
forth
attempted
set
forth
initial
application
fed
rule
civ
proc
failure
initially
verify
charge
sign
pleading
written
motion
paper
fed
rule
civ
proc
fatal
petitioners
cases
edelman
becker
counsel
initial
omission
assertion
government
position
lacked
substantial
justification
beyond
government
insists
strenuously
waiver
sovereign
immunity
liability
fees
conditioned
fee
applicant
meticulous
compliance
every
requirement
within
days
final
judgment
brief
respondent
tr
oral
arg
see
ardestani
ins
eaja
renders
liable
attorney
fees
otherwise
liable
thus
amounts
partial
waiver
sovereign
government
view
failure
allege
position
substantially
justified
clock
run
fatal
omission
specification
brief
respondent
tr
oral
arg
observe
first
federal
circuit
reading
unyielding
government
indeed
federal
circuit
held
fee
application
may
amended
time
show
applicant
eligible
receive
award
see
bazalo
amendment
made
filing
period
cured
failure
initially
establish
fee
applicant
net
worth
exceed
million
earlier
noted
see
supra
dissenting
judge
scarborough
case
found
bazalo
indistinguishable
opinion
mayer
decisions
irwin
department
veterans
affairs
franconia
associates
enlightening
issue
irwin
involved
untimely
filed
title
vii
employment
discrimination
complaint
government
although
petitioner
missed
filing
deadline
held
title
vii
statutory
time
limits
subject
equitable
tolling
even
government
similarly
franconia
rejected
unduly
restrictive
construction
statute
limitations
claims
filed
tucker
act
see
internal
quotation
marks
brackets
omitted
ibid
refusing
adopt
special
accrual
rule
commencement
limitations
period
government
decisions
recognized
limitation
principles
generally
apply
government
way
apply
private
parties
quoting
irwin
congress
waives
sovereign
immunity
observed
judicial
application
time
prescription
suits
government
way
prescription
applicable
private
suits
amounts
little
broadening
congressional
waiver
irwin
stated
irwin
holding
government
responsible
likely
realistic
assessment
legislative
intent
well
practically
useful
principle
interpretation
government
nevertheless
maintains
irwin
franconia
bear
case
section
authorizes
fee
awards
government
rules
analogue
private
litigation
brief
respondent
hardly
clear
irwin
demands
precise
private
analogue
litigation
exists
congress
enacted
legislation
creating
rights
government
often
matters
peculiar
government
engagements
private
persons
matters
administration
benefit
programs
many
statutes
create
claims
relief
agencies
apply
government
defendants
irwin
reasoning
diminished
instructive
situations
readily
identifiable
equivalent
event
analogous
provisions
abrogating
general
rule
party
lawsuit
pays
legal
fees
provision
resembles
prevailing
party
statutes
applicable
suits
private
litigants
see
fair
debt
collection
practices
act
family
medical
leave
act
title
vii
cf
franconia
comparing
tucker
act
statute
limitations
contemporaneous
state
statutes
limitations
applicable
suits
private
parties
also
tie
commencement
limitations
period
date
claim
note
finally
government
never
argued
prejudiced
scarborough
substantially
justified
allegation
permitted
relate
back
timely
filed
fee
application
moreover
showing
prejudice
preclude
operation
doctrine
first
place
see
singleton
interests
government
courts
served
however
district
courts
empowered
outright
deny
request
supplement
fee
application
government
addition
eaja
check
section
disallows
fees
special
circumstances
make
award
unjust
see
safety
valve
gives
discretion
deny
awards
equitable
considerations
dictate
award
made
conclusion
timely
filed
eaja
fee
application
may
amended
time
allege
position
substantially
justified
therefore
expose
government
unfair
imposition
reasons
stated
judgment
appeals
federal
circuit
reversed
case
remanded
proceedings
consistent
opinion
ordered
randall
scarborough
petitioner
anthony
principi
secretary
veterans
affairs
writ
certiorari
appeals
federal
circuit
may
justice
thomas
justice
scalia
joins
dissenting
without
deciding
statutorily
mandated
deadline
even
applies
substantially
justified
allegation
requirement
ante
nonetheless
applies
doctrine
cure
omitted
substantial
justification
allegation
petitioner
equal
access
justice
act
eaja
fee
application
first
addressed
whether
textual
matter
substantial
justification
allegation
must
made
within
deadline
conclude
must
question
becomes
whether
judicial
application
doctrine
appropriate
case
statute
defines
scope
government
waiver
sovereign
immunity
express
allowance
relation
back
eaja
conclude
sovereign
immunity
canon
applies
construe
strictly
scope
government
waiver
reaches
holding
today
distorting
scope
irwin
department
veterans
affairs
eviscerating
case
doctrinal
underpinnings
view
better
reading
text
statute
deadline
applies
substantial
justification
allegation
requirement
first
sentence
party
seeking
award
fees
expenses
shall
within
thirty
days
final
judgment
action
submit
application
fees
shows
applicant
status
prevailing
party
applicant
eligible
receive
fees
itemized
amount
sought
second
sentence
provides
party
shall
also
allege
position
substantially
justified
ibid
stating
applicant
shall
also
make
substantial
justification
allegation
second
sentence
links
allegation
requirement
timing
content
requirements
first
indeed
one
deadline
expressly
contained
provision
deadline
imposes
limitation
set
requirements
petitioner
must
satisfy
order
receive
eaja
fee
award
immediately
following
deadline
another
sentence
requires
petitioner
make
substantial
justification
allegation
taking
provision
whole
quite
natural
read
applying
deadline
reading
confirmed
numerous
federal
agency
interpreted
nearly
identical
eaja
provision
allowing
fees
adversary
adjudications
conducted
federal
ii
conclude
substantial
justification
allegation
must
made
within
deadline
question
becomes
whether
doctrine
apply
eaja
requirement
filing
timely
fee
application
statutorily
prescribed
content
condition
waiver
sovereign
immunity
see
ardestani
ins
scope
waiver
must
strictly
construed
see
irwin
stating
waiver
sovereign
immunity
must
construed
strictly
favor
sovereign
enlarge
beyond
language
requires
internal
quotation
marks
omitted
library
congress
shaw
lehman
nakshian
imitations
conditions
upon
government
consents
sued
must
strictly
observed
exceptions
thereto
implied
internal
quotation
marks
omitted
since
doctrine
relied
upon
present
text
statute
simple
application
sovereign
immunity
canon
petitioner
entitled
allegation
beyond
deadline
way
avoids
straightforward
conclusion
applying
irwin
ante
although
irwin
perhaps
narrow
scope
sovereign
immunity
canon
limited
circumstances
particular
government
made
subject
suit
extent
manner
private
parties
irwin
holds
government
subject
rules
applicable
private
suits
irwin
addressing
equitable
tolling
explained
ime
requirements
lawsuits
private
litigants
customarily
subject
tolling
nce
congress
made
waiver
sovereign
immunity
making
rule
equitable
tolling
applicable
suits
government
way
applicable
private
suits
amounts
little
broadening
congressional
waiver
ibid
citations
omitted
determined
uch
principle
likely
realistic
assessment
legislative
intent
well
practically
useful
principle
interpretation
ibid
notwithstanding
irwin
limited
scope
concludes
irwin
reasoning
diminished
instructive
situations
readily
identifiable
equivalent
ante
existence
equivalent
however
formed
basis
holding
irwin
agree
government
analogue
private
litigation
brief
respondent
eaja
fee
awards
issue
section
authorizes
fee
awards
government
basis
recovery
rules
private
irwin
analysis
simply
apply
proceeding
government
analogue
private
litigation
accordingly
apply
sovereign
immunity
canon
construe
strictly
scope
government
waiver
therefore
allowing
applicant
avoid
express
statutory
limitation
judicial
application
doctrine
reasons
respectfully
dissent
footnotes
subsection
except
otherwise
specifically
provided
statute
judgment
costs
may
awarded
prevailing
party
civil
action
brought
jurisdiction
action
reduction
applies
social
security
cases
see
pub
stat
account
large
majority
eaja
awards
mecham
annual
report
director
administrative
office
courts
scarborough
already
invoked
cavc
exclusive
jurisdiction
appealing
board
veterans
appeals
july
decision
denying
claim
disability
benefits
well
applied
fees
distinguishes
case
torres
oakland
scavenger
government
relies
see
brief
respondent
torres
involved
omission
required
content
applicant
name
notice
appeal
filing
triggers
jurisdiction
case
see
agree
requires
fee
applicant
allege
government
position
substantially
justified
regard
dissent
sees
fire
flame
guides
dissent
sets
post
nn
rules
agency
regulations
address
applicant
must
plead
question
time
presented
see
fed
equity
rule
may
time
furtherance
justice
upon
terms
may
permit
process
proceeding
pleading
record
amended
material
supplemental
matter
set
forth
amended
supplemental
pleading
every
stage
proceeding
must
disregard
error
defect
proceeding
affect
substantial
rights
parties
rev
stats
ch
time
final
judgment
civil
action
amendments
may
allowed
process
pleading
proceedings
cause
action
cross
demand
defense
set
amended
pleading
shall
barred
lapse
time
time
prescribed
limited
expired
original
pleading
filed
amended
pleading
grew
transaction
occurrence
set
original
pleading
rev
stat
remington
cause
action
barred
statute
limitations
stated
original
complaint
counterclaim
shall
barred
introduced
amendment
later
stage
action
adverse
party
fairly
apprised
nature
original
pleading
scarborough
also
urges
regardless
availability
relation
back
deadline
apply
requirement
brief
petitioner
support
scarborough
points
congress
easily
placed
allegation
requirement
first
sentence
together
deadline
specifications
congress
decision
instead
set
forth
allegation
requirement
separate
second
sentence
contains
time
limitation
scarborough
asserts
significant
moreover
scarborough
contends
fact
second
sentence
structured
differently
section
first
sentence
requiring
party
allege
rather
directing
application
sho
indicates
congress
viewed
substantially
justified
allegation
separate
fee
application
requirements
closely
linked
filing
deadline
think
question
government
suggests
answered
commissioner
ins
jean
see
brief
respondent
tr
oral
arg
jean
held
party
prevails
fee
litigation
eaja
may
recover
fees
legal
services
rendered
fee
litigation
even
government
positions
regarding
proper
fee
substantially
justified
district
need
make
second
finding
substantial
justification
awarding
fees
fee
contest
sentence
jean
government
relies
stating
fee
application
must
contain
allegation
position
substantially
justified
like
jean
holding
concern
timing
question
confront
event
decision
rests
applicability
doctrine
explore
debatable
question
whether
deadline
even
applies
substantially
justified
allegation
requirement
question
whether
fee
application
may
amended
filing
period
cure
initial
failure
make
show
ings
set
forth
first
sentence
us
offer
view
applicability
relation
back
situation
although
held
equitable
tolling
applied
title
vii
claims
government
determined
doctrine
requirements
met
specific
facts
irwin
irwin
petitioner
excuse
late
complaint
lawyer
absence
office
eeoc
notice
triggered
deadline
received
ranked
best
garden
variety
claim
excusable
neglect
case
note
government
extensively
argues
recourse
irwin
rebuttable
presumption
equitable
tolling
available
litigation
congress
authorized
see
brief
respondent
decision
rests
grounds
express
opinion
applicability
equitable
tolling
circumstances
presented
indeed
enacting
eaja
congress
expressed
belief
minimum
held
standards
litigating
private
parties
footnotes
also
defined
likewise
webster
ninth
new
collegiate
dictionary
like
manner
black
law
dictionary
ed
several
courts
appeals
explicitly
require
applicant
include
substantial
justification
allegation
eaja
fee
application
see
federal
appeals
manual
local
rules
west
local
form
eaja
fee
application
ca
fed
form
application
fees
expenses
eaja
rule
application
shall
identify
specific
position
party
alleges
substantially
justified
rule
application
must
identify
position
agency
thereof
applicant
alleges
substantially
justified
rule
application
shall
identify
position
government
agency
thereof
proceeding
applicant
alleges
substantially
justified
see
cfr
application
shall
identify
position
agency
agencies
proceeding
applicant
alleges
substantially
justified
cfr
application
shall
identify
position
epa
proceeding
applicant
alleges
substantially
justified
cfr
application
shall
identify
position
department
commerce
applicant
alleges
substantially
justified
cfr
application
award
fees
expenses
applicant
shall
include
allegation
position
department
education
substantially
justified
including
description
specific
position
cfr
application
award
fees
expenses
act
shall
identify
position
department
housing
urban
development
agencies
applicant
alleges
substantially
justified
cfr
application
shall
identify
position
postal
service
proceeding
applicant
alleges
substantially
justified
see
party
seeking
award
fees
expenses
shall
within
thirty
days
final
disposition
adversary
adjudication
submit
agency
application
shows
party
prevailing
party
eligible
receive
award
section
amount
sought
including
itemized
statement
attorney
agent
expert
witness
representing
appearing
behalf
party
stating
actual
time
expended
rate
fees
expenses
computed
party
shall
also
allege
position
agency
substantially
justified
compare
except
otherwise
specifically
provided
statute
shall
award
prevailing
party
fees
expenses
incurred
party
civil
action
brought
jurisdiction
action
unless
finds
position
substantially
justified
special
circumstances
make
award
unjust
shall
liable
fees
expenses
extent
party
liable
common
law
terms
statute
specifically
provides
award