4 canonical passages across 4 cases, quoted by 15 opinions in total. These passages cluster together because the same opinions keep quoting them side by side — they state parts of one doctrine. The anchor passage is from Rosario Gutierrez v. Jo Anne Barnhart, Commissioner, Social Security Administration.
| # | Case | Flag | Canonical passage | Citers |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| 1 | Rosario Gutierrez v. Jo Anne Barnhart, Commissioner, Social Security Administration Anchor | green | “an 23 applicant for disability benefits becomes a prevailing party for the purposes of the eaja if the 24 denial of her benefits is reversed and remanded regardless of whether disability benefits 25 ultimately are awarded.” | 5 |
| 2 | Craig Tobeler v. Carolyn W. Colvin | green | “substantial 2 justification means 'justified in substance or in the main-that is, justified to a degree that could 3 satisfy a reasonable person.” | 4 |
| 3 | Kinney v. Yerusalim | green | “the relevant question is whether the government's decision to 10 defend on appeal the procedural errors committed by the alj was substantially justified” | 3 |
| 4 | Kimberly Gardner v. Nancy Berryhill | green | “in 11 determining whether a party is eligible for fees under eaja, the district court must determine 12 whether the government's position regarding the specific issue on which the district court based 13 its remand was 'substantially justified'-not whether the alj would ultimate…” | 3 |
A red or yellow flag on a member means the underlying case has negative treatment — for those, check the case page before relying on the passage.