Federal Claims· 3/31/2009

Information Sciences Corp. v. United States

Citations

86 Fed. Cl. 269
2009 U.S. Claims LEXIS 77
2009 WL 877708

How courts have described this case

Verbatim parenthetical descriptions written by other courts when citing this decision. Ranked by citation-network relevance.

noting that this court has jurisdiction over EAJA claims when it also possesses jurisdiction over the underlying action for which attorneys fees or expenses are re quested
noting that although the Supreme Court held that paralegal fees are to be awarded at “prevailing market rates,” the Supreme Court “did not provide trial courts with guidance in how to determine ‘the prevailing market rate’”
refusing to reduce award where court set aside a contract and ordered GSA to issue a revised solicitation but refused to grant injunctive relief
“Self-serving affidavits and unaudited balances, alone, are not considered sufficient to establish a plaintiff’s net worth.”
“Self-serving affidavits and unaudited balances, alone, are not considered sufficient to establish a plaintiff’s net worth.”
describing the ABA’s definition of paralegal and finding that certain paralegal time entries were recoverable notwithstanding the government’s argument that they were clerical in nature

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).

Judges: Braden

Read full opinion on CourtListener

Cited by

17 cases in this archive cite this case.

Cites

44 cases in this archive are cited by this case; the 20 most cited are listed.

Other cases with this name

Sourced from CourtListener / Free Law Project (CC0).

This is legal information, not legal advice. Laws vary by jurisdiction and change frequently. Always verify current law with official sources and consult a licensed attorney in your jurisdiction for advice on your specific situation.