United States Court of International Trade

Slip Op. 20-33

Before the Court in Sumecht NA, Inc. v. United States, et. al., Slip Op. 20-33, Court No. 17-00244 (March 12, 2020) was an application, by plaintiff, for an award of attorneys’ fees and expenses under the Equal Access to Justice Act (“EAJA”), 28 U.S.C. § 2412. The Government opposed the application.  For the following reasons, the Court denied the application.

“The Court may award EAJA fees and other expenses when the applicant shows that it is an eligible and prevailing party in a civil action brought by or against the United States, unless the Court finds that the position of the United States was substantially justified or that special circumstances make an award unjust.” Id. at 6. “A plaintiff bears the burden of showing it is a ‘prevailing party’ that meets the financial eligibility conditions.” Id. The Court found that “in this case, Sumecht put forth insufficient evidence to meet the prevailing party criteria.” Id. at 8. The Court explained that Sumecht’s evidence regarding the net worth requirement was insufficient. The Court also noted that Sumecht’s independent auditor’s report lacked any indicia of reliability because it failed to state who provided accounting services and that the auditor prepared the report using Generally Accepted Accounting Principles. The Court also noted the Government “had substantial justification for maintaining its position at the administrative agency level and defending the validity of the agency action in court.” Id. at 10. In addition, the Court found no ground to award fees under a common law analysis because “the record contains no evidence that Defendant acted in bad faith while maintaining its position or acted with improper purpose.” Id. at 13.