S. et al v. DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA PUBLIC SCHOOLS, No. 1:2015cv00851 - Document 30 (D.D.C. 2016)
Court Description: MEMORANDUM OPINION re plaintiffs' 25 Motion for Attorneys' Fees and Costs. See Opinion and accompanying 31 Order for details. Signed by Judge Ellen S. Huvelle on August 30, 2016. (lcesh1)
Download PDF
<![CDATA[
S. et al v. DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA PUBLIC SCHOOLS Doc. 30 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA _________________________________________ ) DAMARCUS S., by and through his ) Parent, K.S., ) ) Plaintiffs, ) ) v. ) ) DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA, ) ) Defendant. ) _________________________________________ ) Civil Action No. 15-851 (ESH) MEMORANDUM OPINION Plaintiffs Damarcus S. and his mother, K.S., have moved for attorney’s fees and costs pursuant to the Individuals with Disabilities Education Act (“IDEA”), 20 U.S.C. §§ 1400 et seq., which grants the Court discretion to award reasonable fees to a prevailing party. See id. § 1415(i)(3)(B). (Pl.’s Mot. for Attorneys’ Fees and Costs [ECF No. 25] (“Pls.’ Mot.”).) The District of Columbia (the “District”) does not dispute that plaintiffs are entitled to fees, but it argues that plaintiffs’ request of $212,081.51 in fees and $4,097.60 in costs is unreasonable and should be denied in part. (See Def.’s Opp’n Br. [ECF No. 27] at 3.) The Court agrees that plaintiffs are not entitled to the full amount requested, though they are entitled to more than the District proposes to pay. Therefore, plaintiffs’ motion will be granted in part and denied in part. BACKGROUND The background of this case has been laid out in great detail in the Court’s previous Memorandum Opinion. See Damarcus S. v. Dist. of Columbia, 2016 WL 2993158, at *1-*2 (D.D.C. May 23, 2016). As is relevant here, plaintiffs filed an administrative complaint with the Dockets.Justia.com District in December 2014, alleging that numerous deficiencies in the District’s educational plans for Damarcus denied him a Free Appropriate Public Education (“FAPE”), to which he is entitled under IDEA.1 Id. at *2. After an administrative Due Process Hearing in March 2015, the Hearing Officer determined that plaintiffs were time-barred from pursuing any claims involving conduct prior to December 16, 2012, and rejected all but one of plaintiffs’ remaining claims on the merits. Id. As a result of the District’s failure to conduct a behavioral assessment and put in place an intervention plan for Damarcus in 2013 and 2014, plaintiffs were awarded (1) reimbursement for an independent behavioral evaluation of Damarcus, and (2) fifty hours of behavioral support services. Id. But without explanation, the Hearing Officer ruled that those behavioral-support hours would be forfeited if plaintiffs did not use them before June 30, 2016. Id. Plaintiffs filed suit in this Court to challenge the Hearing Officer’s adverse determinations, and the parties then cross-moved for summary judgment. The Court found for plaintiffs on many claims: (1) that the Hearing Officer erred in her blanket dismissal of all claims arising out of pre-December 2012 conduct, rather than conducting an individualized analysis of when plaintiffs knew or should have known about each claim, id. at *6; (2) that the District denied Damarcus a FAPE in 2013 and 2014 by dramatically cutting his speech-language services and failing to adjust his Individualized Education Program (“IEP”) in response to his demonstrated lack of progress, id. at *12; (3) that the Hearing Officer’s compensatory award was improperly limited as to both subject (behavioral support services) and time (the June 2016 forfeiture provision), id. at *14; (4) that the compensatory award of fifty hours was insufficient 1 Plaintiffs also filed two previous complaints that involved similar claims, but they were withdrawn prior to being adjudicated. Damarcus S., 2016 WL 2993158, at *2. 2 by failing to reflect the pervasive effect of Damarcus’s behavior on all aspects of his education, id. at *14-*15; and (5) that plaintiffs were entitled to reimbursement for an independent neuropsychological evaluation of Damarcus, id. at *15. In light of deficiencies in the record, the Court remanded to the Hearing Officer to allow the parties to more fully brief the issue of an appropriate award of compensatory education. Id. at *12, *15. On the other hand, the Court rejected plaintiffs’ remaining claims: (1) that Damarcus’s 2013 and 2014 IEPs were necessarily deficient because they relied on deficient neuropsychological and speech-language evaluations, id. at *8; (2) that Damarcus was denied a FAPE because his IEPs failed to set out measureable baselines, failed to specify that he would receive research-based, peer-reviewed instruction, and set inappropriately low benchmarks, id. at *9-*10; (3) that the District failed to place Damarcus in the least restrictive environment, id. at *12; (4) that the District inappropriately implemented Damarcus’s IEPs, id. at *13; (5) that the District’s treatment of Damarcus violated Section 504 of the Rehabilitation Act, id. at *16; and (6) that the District should be required to immediately develop an appropriate IEP, id. at *17. ANALYSIS The District does not dispute plaintiffs’ entitlement to attorney’s fees, given the many claims on which plaintiffs have prevailed. However, the District argues that the award requested by plaintiffs is unreasonable on several grounds, which the Court will now turn to. I. UNREASONABLE BILLING RATES The District first argues that the hourly rates sought by plaintiffs’ attorneys and paralegals are unreasonable. (Def.’s Opp’n Br. at 4–11.) In determining a reasonable fee award, the Court must ensure that it is “based on rates prevailing in the community in which the action or proceeding arose for the kind and quality of services furnished.” 20 U.S.C. § 1415(i)(3)(C). 3 Plaintiffs bear the burden on this issue, as with all other aspects of their fee request. See Covington v. Dist. of Columbia, 57 F.3d 1101, 1107 (D.C. Cir. 1995) (“[A] fee applicant bears the burden of establishing entitlement to an award, documenting the appropriate hours, and justifying the reasonableness of the rates[.]”). In addition to offering their own attorneys’ affidavits, fee applicants may also “submit attorneys’ fee matrices as one type of evidence that ‘provide[s] a useful starting point’ in calculating the prevailing market rate.” Eley v. Dist. of Columbia, 793 F.3d 97, 100 (D.C. Cir. 2015) (quoting Covington, 57 F.3d at 1109). These matrices set out the hourly fees charged by attorneys at various levels of experience in a particular community for the same type of work, which offer a “somewhat crude” approximation of prevailing market rates. Snead v. Dist. of Columbia, 139 F. Supp. 3d 375, 378 (D.D.C. 2015) (quoting Eley, 793 F.3d at 101). The most commonly used fee matrix was the “Laffey Matrix,” which was compiled by the District United States Attorney’s Office (“USAO”) and updated annually to adjust for inflation. Eley, 793 F.3d at 100-01. However, beginning on June 1, 2015, the USAO discontinued the Laffey Matrix in favor of a matrix that uses a new methodology, which the Court will refer to as the “USAO Matrix.” See USAO Attorney’s Fees Matrix – 2015 – 2016, https://www.justice.gov/usaodc/file/796471/download.2 Here, plaintiffs’ counsel submit an affidavit from Dennis C. McAndrews, the Managing Partner at their firm, which attests that these “hourly rates for attorneys of comparable 2 The USAO Matrix rates are generally higher than the previous year’s Laffey Matrix rates. Compare USAO Attorney’s Fees Matrix – 2015 – 2016, https://www.justice.gov/usaodc/file/796471/download, with Laffey Matrix – 2014-2015, https://www.justice.gov/sites/default/files/usao-dc/legacy/2014/07/14/Laffey%20Matrix_20142015.pdf. That said, once annual inflation is considered, the matrices are similar enough to make reliance on Laffey Matrix cases appropriate here. Indeed, the parties’ briefs tend to use the “Laffey” and “USAO” descriptors interchangeably. (See Def.’s Opp’n Br. at 6 n.2.) 4 experience and skill in this area are at least equal to, and frequently exceed, the hourly rates” they have requested. (Ex. B to Pls.’ Mot. [ECF No. 25-3] ¶ 17.) They also submit affidavits from local attorneys who did not work on this case, stating that the rates charged by plaintiffs’ attorneys are consistent with those charged by their firms and other area firms, including in IDEA cases. (Ex. 1 to Pls.’ Reply Br. [ECF No. 29-1] ¶¶ 13, 22; Ex. 2 to Pls.’ Reply Br. [ECF No. 29-2] ¶ 10.) Finally, they submit the 2015-16 USAO Matrix, which reflects rates charged in District of Columbia courts in civil cases where a fee-shifting statute permits the prevailing party to recover “reasonable” attorney’s fees.3 (Ex. C. to Pls.’ Mot. at 1 & n.1.) The attorney rates listed in the 2015-16 USAO Matrix are uniformly higher than those sought by plaintiffs. (Compare Ex. A to Pls.’ Mot. with Ex. C to Pl.’s Mot. at 1.) The District argues that the rates in the Laffey or USAO Matrices should not be applied here, because those matrices establish presumptive rates for more complex federal litigation than typical IDEA administrative proceedings. (Def.’s Opp’n Br. at 6.) Instead, it argues that plaintiffs should receive 75% of Laffey or USAO rates because “the overwhelming majority of cases apply[] [such] rates to similar [IDEA] litigation, especially in cases since Eley.” (Id. at 7 & n.4, 9.) Plaintiffs respond by citing a slew of post-Eley cases in which full Laffey or USAO rates were awarded in IDEA cases. (See Pls.’ Reply Br. at 6 n.1.) At the outset, it is worth repeating that plaintiffs do not seek full USAO rates, or even a uniform percentage of them. Instead, they seek the rates customarily charged by their firm (see Ex. B to Pls.’ Mot. ¶ 4), which vary by attorney and are uniformly lower than the USAO Matrix rates. For instance, Dennis McAndrews’ rate of $450 is only 79% of what an attorney of his 3 By its own terms, the USAO Matrix is appropriately considered in this federal IDEA case, given the IDEA’s fee shifting provision. (See Ex. C. to Pls.’ Mot. at 1 & n.1; 20 U.S.C. § 1415(i)(3)(B).) 5 experience level (38 years) would receive under the current USAO Matrix. In fact, two junior attorneys who worked on the case are billed at rates less than 75% of the current USAO rate. (See id. ¶ 11; Ex. A to Pls.’ Mot. (billing out fourth-year attorneys at $230/hour and $240/hour, which is 71% and 74% of the USAO rates, respectively). The highest attorney rates sought by plaintiffs in relation to the current USAO Matrix are only 85% of those rates. (See Ex. A to Pls.’ Mot. (billing out Attorney CEM (4 years) at $275/hour, where full USAO rate is $325/hour). Thus, the District’s argument about the applicability of full Laffey or USAO rates in IDEA litigation is off the mark—the relevant question is whether plaintiffs have shouldered their burden to show that the rates they actually seek are reasonable. Moreover, plaintiffs are correct that many of the cases cited by the District involved routine IDEA matters, and thus, a 75% Laffey rate was deemed appropriate in that context. See, e.g., Snead, 139 F. Supp. 3d at 381 (involving an “unremarkable IDEA administrative representation”); Joaquin v. Friendship Pub. Charter Sch., 2016 WL 3034151, at *14 (D.D.C. May 27, 2016) (case was not “unusually complex”); Platt v. Dist. of Columbia, 2016 WL 912171, at *11 (D.D.C. Mar. 7, 2016) (quoting Blackman v. Dist. Of Columbia, 56 F. Supp 3d 19, 29 (D.D.C. 2014)) (case involved “no ‘novel questions of law,’ burdensome discovery issues, or other unusual complexities”); McAllister v. Dist. of Columbia, 21 F. Supp. 3d 94, 109 (D.D.C. 2014) (finding lack of complexity in cases where, inter alia, school district either defaulted or failed to contest issues, no administrative hearing was conducted due to settlement, or hearing had limited number of witnesses). Here, in contrast, the parties engaged in a two-day hearing with ten witnesses and sixtyeight exhibits, resulting in the creation of a 1,300 page administrative record. (See Pls.’ Reply Br. at 11; Administrative Record [ECF Nos. 12-13].) The case involved a challenging question 6 of statutory interpretation that was a matter of first impression in this district, which arose from an apparent drafting error in the 2004 amendment of the IDEA. See Damarcus S., 2016 WL 2993158, at *4; see also Blackman, 56 F. Supp. 3d at 25 (“novel or complicated questions of law” indicate complexity). The District discounts that complexity when it chides plaintiffs for “[m]erely summarizing the reasoning of” G.L. v. Ligonier Valley School District Authority, 802 F.3d 601 (3d Cir. 2015), which this Court ultimately adopted. (See Def.’s Opp’n Br. at 8.) But the statutory issue was apparently complex enough that both parties here actually reversed the positions they took below. (See Def.’s Cross-Mot. for Summ. J. [ECF No. 16] at 13 n.6.) Furthermore, the issue of how to properly evaluate Damarcus’s disability—whether to use a FullScale IQ or General Ability Index—was complicated, something the Court’s Memorandum Opinion expressly noted. See Damarcus S., 2016 WL 2993158, at *8 (“When considering an issue of such complexity . . . .”). Put simply, this was not a run-of-the-mill IDEA proceeding, and therefore, the Court finds that rates falling between 75% and 100% of Laffey / USAO Matrix rates are reasonable. This raises the question of which rates should serve as the appropriate point of comparison: the current USAO rates, or the rates that applied in the years that the work was actually performed. As noted, plaintiffs’ requested rates range from 71% to 85% of the current USAO rates; however, when using the lower 2013-14 Laffey rates4 as a point of comparison, those relative percentages rise to 84% to 110%. (See Ex. A to Pls.’ Mot.; Ex. B to Pls.’ Mot. (billing out Attorney MEG (25 years) at $430/hour, where full Laffey rate was $510/ hour; billing out Attorney CEM (2 years) at $275/hour, where full Laffey rate was $250/hour). In other 4 See Laffey Matrix – 2013 – 2014, https://www.justice.gov/sites/default/files/usaodc/legacy/2013/09/09/Laffey_Matrix%202014.pdf. 7 words, plaintiffs seek rates for previous years’ work that occasionally exceed the Laffey rates that applied in those years, even though they all fall below the USAO Matrix rates. The District argues that historical Laffey rates should apply (Def.’s Opp’n Br. at 10-11), and plaintiffs respond that the D.C. Circuit has sanctioned the application of current rates, as a means of accounting for the delay in receiving payment, (Pls.’ Reply Br. at 14 (citing West v. Potter, 717 F.3d 1030, 1034 (D.C. Cir. 2013).) West was a Title VII case, a fact that was expressly relevant to the result in that case. See 717 F.3d at 1034. West also notes that there is a “strong presumption” in favor of the application of historical rates. Id.; see also JacksonJohnson v. Dist. of Columbia, 2016 WL 1267153, at *3 (D.D.C. Mar. 31, 2016) (applying historical rates); Reed v. Dist. of Columbia, 134 F. Supp. 3d 122, 137 (D.D.C. 2015) (same). There was no unusual delay in this three-year IDEA case, no dilatory conduct on the part of the District, and as noted, the rates requested by plaintiffs are more reasonable in comparison to recent years’ Matrix rates than to those prior years’ rates. See West, 717 F.3d at 240 (appropriate to apply historical rates if delay in payment was brief, or if rates sought by plaintiffs incorporate compensation for delayed payment). The Court thus deems it appropriate to compare plaintiffs’ requested rates to those in effect at the time the work was performed. As discussed, plaintiffs are entitled to attorneys’ rates that fall between 75%-100% of Laffey / USAO Matrix rates, so if an attorney’s requested rate exceeds the Laffey or USAO Matrix rate for that year, it shall be capped at the lower rate. (See, e.g., Ex. A to Pls.’ Mot. (showing that Attorney CEM’s requested rate exceeds the full Laffey rate from 2012-13 to 2014-15, and that Attorney HMH’s requested rate exceeds the full Laffey rate in 2012-13 and 2013-14).) One final note on rates: the above analysis has focused only on attorneys’ rates, not on those sought for paralegals and legal assistants. Here, plaintiffs seek rates that exceed the current 8 USAO rate for their legal assistants and paralegals, and significantly exceed the current USAO rate for two senior paralegals. (See Pls.’ Mot. at 8 n.4.) They argue that the extensive experience of their senior paralegals justifies their rates—which are 20% higher than the full USAO rate—and that their “knowledge and expertise play a vital role in the continued success and growth” of the law firm. (See id.) However, the analysis here involves a comparison to prevailing rates in the community, based on the type of services provided. See 20 U.S.C. § 1415(i)(3)(C). The only relevant evidence that plaintiffs themselves offer (i.e., the 2015-16 USAO Matrix) demonstrates that they seek far more for their senior paralegals than the prevailing community rate. (See Ex. C to Pls.’ Mot. at 1 (taking no account of paralegals’ level of experience).) Plaintiffs do not suggest that these paralegals did more complex work than paralegals working on similar IDEA cases, such that an upward departure might be justified. Nor do they offer any explanation as to why their other paralegals and legal assistants should be entitled to rates that exceed the USAO Matrix. Therefore, the Court will award plaintiffs’ senior paralegals 85% of the USAO Matrix rate ($131/hour), and their remaining paralegals and legal assistants 75% of the USAO rate ($116/hour). These rates are commensurate to the rates awarded to plaintiffs’ attorneys, which ranged from 71% to 85% of the current USAO rates. They also fall below the historical Laffey rates for previous years’ work, so they are reasonably applied throughout the course of this litigation. II. LIMITED SUCCESS The District next argues that plaintiffs’ fee request should be reduced 20% to reflect their limited success in this litigation. (See Def.’s Opp’n Br. at 11-14.) Plaintiffs in turn propose a 10% reduction on that basis. (See Pls.’ Reply Br. at 18.) The parties thus agree on the underlying legal principle—that, because plaintiffs’ various claims are interrelated, it is 9 impossible to separate out the work done on unsuccessful claims, and so the Court must “simply reduce the award to account for the limited success.” See Hensley v. Eckerhart, 461 U.S. 424, 436–37 (1983). As the District concedes, plaintiffs “received much of the relief they sought.” (See Def.’s Opp’n Br. at 14.) Although the Hearing Officer must still determine the precise amount of compensatory education that Damarcus will receive, it is beyond dispute that the award will be significant: not only was the existing behavioral award of 50 hours deemed insufficient, but Damarcus will also receive compensatory hours for the District’s failure to respond to his academic difficulties, and for drastically cutting his speech-language pathology hours despite those difficulties. See Damarcus S., 2016 WL 2993158, at *12-*15. These were both serious failures. The Court’s statute-of-limitations ruling also makes it possible that he will receive additional relief on remand for alleged violations that the Hearing Officer erroneously deemed time-barred. See id. at *6. On the other side of the scale, the claims that the Court rejected were less significant—if plaintiffs had succeeded on those claims, they would have received far less relief. See, e.g., id. at *9-*10 (plaintiffs’ claims regarding IEP baselines, IEP goals, and specificity of IEPs, even if theoretically plausible, failed because they caused no injury); id. at *16 (if successful, plaintiffs’ Rehabilitation Act claim would only have entitled them to expert witness fees). Therefore, in light of the fact that plaintiffs received a substantial majority of the relief they sought, the Court finds that a 15% reduction of the total fee award is appropriate. III. BILLING PRACTICES The District takes issue with three billing practices reflected in plaintiffs’ invoice, arguing that the use of these practices warrants a further 25% reduction of the total fee award. (Def.’s Opp’n Br. at 14-17.) 10 First, it asserts that plaintiffs’ invoice calculates time to the eighth of an hour, rather than “the industry-norm of billing to the tenth of an hour,” resulting in a less accurate bill. (Id. at 15.) It is certainly true that the award may “be reduced to account for any inaccuracies and overbilling that may have occurred as a result of [plaintiffs’] unacceptable timekeeping habits.” See Citizens for Responsibility & Ethics in Washington v. U.S. DOJ, 825 F. Supp. 2d 226, 231 (D.D.C. 2011) (citing Berkeley v. Home Ins. Co., 68 F.3d 1409, 1419–20 (D.C.Cir.1995)). However, the only cases cited by the District involved courts’ disapproval of billing to quarterhour increments. See, e.g., Am. Civil Liberties Union v. U.S. DHS, 810 F. Supp. 2d 267, 278–79 (D.D.C. 2011); A.C. ex rel. Clark v. Dist. of Columbia, 674 F. Supp. 2d 149, 157 (D.D.C. 2009); Blackman v. Dist. of Columbia, 59 F. Supp. 2d 37, 44 n.5 (D.D.C. 1999), abrogated on other grounds by Buckhannon Bd. & Care Home, Inc. v. W. Va. Dep’t of Health & Human Res., 532 U.S. 598, 610 (2001). Nor has the Court located any cases in which billing to the eighth of an hour has been disapproved. In fact, courts in this district have expressly approved billing to the sixth of an hour. See Citizens for Responsibility & Ethics in Washington v. U.S. DOJ, 142 F. Supp. 3d 1, 10 (D.D.C. 2015); see also Citizens for Responsibility & Ethics in Washington v. FEC, 66 F. Supp. 3d 134, 150 (D.D.C. 2014) (noting “a preference for time records that are, at most, in quarter-hour increments”). Thus, there is simply no basis to argue that plaintiffs’ billing to the eighth of an hour is improper. Second, the District argues that rounding errors have inflated plaintiffs’ invoice. (Def.’s Opp’n Br. at 15-16.) In particular, it points out that plaintiffs’ invoice reflects a total of 621.11 hours worked, when in reality it should be 618.125. (Id.) This “total hours” figure was not used to calculate the total fee request, and therefore it is wholly irrelevant. Plaintiffs arrived at their fee request by multiplying each individual time entry by the appropriate rate—which the District 11 acknowledges they did correctly (id. at 15)—and then they added the correct individual amounts together. (See Ex. A to Pls.’ Mot.) It would have been impossible to calculate the total fee request using the total hours figure, because each attorney charged a different rate and thus the multiplier would have varied. As a result, no purported rounding errors affected plaintiffs’ total fee request.5 Finally, plaintiffs assert that a reduction is warranted due to the invoice’s inappropriate use of block billing. (See Def.’s Opp’n Br. at 16-17.) Block billing involves lumping multiple tasks into a single time entry, which can “mak[e] it impossible to evaluate their reasonableness.” Role Models Am., Inc. v. Brownlee, 353 F.3d 962, 971 (D.C. Cir. 2004). There is no question that plaintiffs’ invoice is completely block-billed throughout—it groups all tasks performed by each attorney into a single daily time entry. (See, e.g., Ex. A to Pls.’ Mot. at 49-50 (billing 2.75 hours on fifteen different tasks); id. at 104 (billing two hours on seven different tasks); id. at 119 (billing 7.5 hours on four different tasks); id. at 119-20 (billing 7.875 hours on eight different tasks).) Plaintiffs do not dispute this, but they argue that “there is no prohibition in this Circuit on ‘block billing’ and the use of this practice does not result in a fee reduction where the descriptions within the time entries are otherwise sufficiently detailed and reasonable.” (See Pls.’ Reply Br. at 20.) They also state that block billing is the result of the computer program used by McAndrews Law Offices, arguing that this practice is more efficient. (Id. at 22.) 5 The District also goes to the trouble of asserting an overage of $2.135, which it apparently arrived at by adding fractions of pennies that plaintiffs rounded up. (See Def.’s Opp’n Br. at 16 n.8.) Even if the District had adequately shown how it reached that figure, the Court is concerned with determining a reasonable overall award, not with fractions of pennies that add up to less than the price of a cup of coffee. Cf. Sandifer v. U.S. Steel Corp., 134 S. Ct. 870, 880 (2014) (discussing the doctrine of “de minimis non curat lex (the law does not take account of trifles)”). 12 Plaintiffs’ efforts to defend block billing are unpersuasive, particularly considering that they bear the burden of justifying their fee request. See Covington, 57 F.3d at 1107. Although it is of course true that block billing is not “prohibit[ed],” it is also true that courts often reduce fee awards as a result of it. See, e.g., Role Models Am., Inc., 353 F.3d at 971; Bennett v. Castro, 74 F. Supp. 3d 382, 406 (D.D.C. 2014); In re InPhonic, Inc., 674 F. Supp. 2d 273, 289 (D.D.C. 2009); Summers v. Howard Univ., 2006 WL 751316, at *7 (D.D.C. Mar. 20, 2006). The reason for this is obvious: even if tasks are adequately described, there is simply no way for the Court to assess whether the time spent on each of those tasks was reasonable. See Role Models Am., Inc., 353 F.3d at 970 (quoting In re Olson, 884 F.2d 1415, 1428 (D.C. Cir. 1989) (court must “determine with a high degree of certainty that such hours were actually and reasonably expended”). Where the number of tasks and blocks of time are small, the risk of inaccuracy is also small—if an attorney spends a half-hour emailing opposing counsel and reviewing her response, the Court can be reasonably assured that the time spent was justified. However, if the attorney spends 10.8 hours researching standing, emailing co-counsel, revising a brief, and teleconferencing with the client, the Court lacks that same assurance. Did the research take nine hours? Was it a four-hour teleconference? The Court has no idea. By the same token, the efficiency of block billing is irrelevant, as is the type of computer system used by plaintiffs’ firm—even if plaintiffs’ attorneys might benefit from block billing, the Court is concerned here only with their ability to justify their fee request. This particular invoice fails to adequately do that. If it had relied on block billing infrequently, a reduction might not be warranted, see Fitts v. Unum Life Ins. Co. of Am., 680 F. Supp. 2d 38, 42 (D.D.C. 2010) (declining a reduction where only a “relatively small fraction” of entries were block-billed), but 13 this entire invoice here is block-billed. As a result, the Court will reduce plaintiffs’ total award by an additional 5%. IV. NON-COMPENSABLE TIME The District takes issue with numerous entries that it argues are either wholly noncompensable or improperly billed: time related to resolution sessions meetings (RSMs); time spent on plaintiffs’ earlier administrative complaints, which they voluntarily withdrew; attorney travel time; and time that the District alleges is related to plaintiffs’ ongoing concerns rather than the instant litigation. A. Resolution Session Meetings The District argues that plaintiffs should not be reimbursed for time spent preparing for, or participating in, RSMs. (See Def.’s Opp’n Br. at 17-19 (quoting 20 U.S.C. § 1415(i)(3)(D)(iii) (“A meeting conducted pursuant to subsection (f)(1)(B)(i) shall not be considered a meeting convened as a result of an administrative hearing or judicial action or an administrative hearing or judicial action for purposes of [20 U.S.C. § 1415(i)(3)].”)).) In response, plaintiffs have agreed to withdraw their request for time spent participating in the RSMs, but they insist that time spent preparing for those sessions is fully compensable. (See Pls.’ Reply Br. at 23-24.) Section 1415(i)(3)(D)(iii), when read in context with other provisions in that section, prohibits any award for time spent preparing for an RSM. See Howard v. Achievement Preparatory Acad. Pub. Charter Sch., 2016 WL 1212409, at *14 (D.D.C. Mar. 8, 2016); Brandon E. v. Dep’t of Educ., 2008 WL 4602533, at *7 (D. Haw. Oct. 16, 2008); see also Mars Area Sch. Dist. v. C. L., 2015 WL 8207463, at *6 n.5 (W.D. Pa. Dec. 7, 2015) (citing cases) (noting that it is “well-established” that fees related to RSMs are non-compensable). First, an 14 RSM is a meeting of the IEP team. See 20 U.S.C. § 1415(f)(1)(B)(i) (defining an RSM as “a meeting with the parents and the relevant member or members of the IEP Team”). Next, an award of attorney’s fees is prohibited if it “relat[es] to any meeting of the IEP team unless such meeting is convened as a result of an administrative proceeding or judicial action.” See id. § 1415(i)(3)(D)(ii). Thus, time spent preparing for an RSM—which “relat[es] to [a] meeting of the IEP Team”—would only be compensable if the exception applies, i.e., if the RSM was “convened as a result of an administrative proceeding or judicial action.” See id. However, the very next provision makes clear that this exception does not apply to an RSM, which “shall not be considered . . . a meeting convened as a result of an administrative hearing or judicial action.” See id. § 1415(i)(3)(D)(iii)(I). The Court recognizes that this issue is not entirely clear-cut. See Y.B. v. Williamson Cty. Bd. of Educ., 2009 WL 4061311, at *25 (M.D. Tenn. Nov. 20, 2009). Even acknowledging the minor statutory inconsistency—Section 1415(i)(3)(D)(ii) uses the phrase “convened as a result of an administrative proceeding,” while Section 1415(i)(3)(D)(iii) says “convened as a result of an administrative hearing”—the Court concludes that it is simply a result of imprecise drafting. Cf. G.L. v. Ligonier Valley School District Authority, 802 F.3d 601, 624 (3d Cir. 2015) (finding that an inconsistency in another part of Section 1415 was the result of a drafting error). The linguistic structure of the exception in (D)(ii) is otherwise identical to the structure in (D)(iii), giving rise to a strong inference that the two provisions were meant to be read in tandem. After all, standing alone, the RSM provision in (D)(iii) has no apparent effect—it is only given meaning if an RSM is an IEP meeting for which attorneys cannot recover for. There is simply no other way to explain its presence in a subsection entitled “Prohibition of attorneys’ fees and related costs for certain services.” See 20 U.S.C. § 1415(i)(3)(D)(iii). 15 Therefore, plaintiffs’ request for RSM preparation fees is denied.6 B. Time Spent on “Earlier Cases” In May 2013 and January 2014, plaintiffs filed and later voluntarily withdrew two administrative complaints against the District, prior to the December 2014 filing of the complaint at issue here. See Damarcus S., 2016 WL 2993158, at *2 (D.D.C. May 23, 2016). As the Court previously noted, the May 2013 complaint raised “basically the same issues” as those raised here, while the January 2014 complaint sought an independent evaluation for which plaintiffs were ultimately awarded reimbursement here. Id. at *2, *15. The District argues that plaintiffs are not entitled to any reimbursement for work done prior to November 6, 2014, because that work related to “earlier cases” in which plaintiffs were not the prevailing party. (See Def.’s Opp’n Br. at 19-20.) Plaintiffs respond that these do not represent different cases at all, but instead are intertwined with the current litigation, such that full reimbursement is appropriate. (See Pls.’ Reply Br. at 24-25.) Although the District is correct that plaintiffs were not prevailing parties in their earlier complaints, that is not the relevant issue here. The issue is whether the work performed prior to November 6, 2014 is reasonably compensable as a result of their success in this litigation. See 20 U.S.C. § 1415 (i)(3)(b)(i). The District does not dispute the interrelatedness of the issues raised in the withdrawn complaints and those raised here, nor could it. Thus, there is no question that much of that earlier work contributed to plaintiffs’ success in this litigation, and as a result, the District’s argument for a full reduction fails. Nevertheless, the Court finds that plaintiffs are 6 Plaintiffs note that their RSM preparation fees are block billed together with unrelated, compensable fees. (See Pls.’ Reply Br. at 24.) This is yet another drawback of block billing. See Role Models Am., Inc., 353 F.3d at 971. The Court will thus approximate the amount of time in those block entries that remain compensable and award only those fees. 16 not entitled to full reimbursement, given that the withdrawal of those complaints prolonged the overall litigation by roughly nineteen months. Despite plaintiffs’ argument that “[a]ll of the work that went into the initial Due Process complaints was directly relevant to this litigation” (Pls.’ Reply. Br. at 25), there is no question that this nineteen-month delay created much additional work, even if it was technically “relevant” to this litigation. (See, e.g., Ex. A to Pls.’ Mot. at 23 (charges for preparation of second complaint); id. at 26 (charges related to Prehearing Conference that was later rendered unnecessary by withdrawal).) To account for this selfimposed delay, which is not reasonably charged to the District, the Court will reduce plaintiffs’ pre-November 6, 2014 award by 20%. C. Attorney Travel Time Plaintiffs concede that their fee request improperly bills attorney travel time at a full rate, as opposed to the proper 50% rate. (See Pls.’ Reply Br. at 25; see also McAllister v. Dist. of Columbia, 21 F. Supp. 3d 94, 106 (D.D.C. 2014) (“[I]n this Circuit, travel time is compensated at half of the attorney’s rate.”). Plaintiffs’ award will be reduced accordingly. D. Unrelated Time The District challenges numerous charges incurred after February 17, 2016, which it argues are unrelated to the instant litigation and therefore non-compensable. (See Def.’s Opp’n Br. at 22-23 & Table 3.) Plaintiffs argue that these entries are clearly related, because they concern (a) counsel’s efforts to implement the Hearing Officer’s and this Court’s award of compensatory education, including through communications with counsel for the District; (b) preparation for the upcoming Due Process hearing on remand ordered by this Court; (c) efforts to settle the instant litigation; or (d) the instant federal court proceedings. 17 (Pls.’ Reply Br. at 27.) Time entries that fall into the latter two categories are compensable at the rates already approved by the Court. However, the Court’s determination of reasonable rates took into account only the complexity of the litigation to the point of judgment (i.e., May 23, 2016), and those are not directly applicable to the former two categories. The Court is not inclined to address in piecemeal fashion the fees performed on remand and in implementing relief: the process is still ongoing, and, at this juncture, the Court cannot determine the complexity of the legal work involved. Moreover, the invoice plainly reflects that certain entries fall outside of the four categories listed by plaintiffs, and thus, they are not compensable. It is unclear, for instance, how work related to future IEP meetings; Damarcus’s current mental health and residence; “alerts;” “Department of Revenue check[s];” or Damarcus’s current IEP, FBA, evaluations, or medical referrals have anything to do with this litigation. (See Ex. A to Pls.’ Mot. at 96-118.) Again, these non-compensable entries have been block-billed with compensable entries. Therefore, as with the time plaintiffs claimed for RSMs, the Court will approximate the necessary reduction of each blocked entry. V. OVER-STAFFING Finally, in one short paragraph, the District argues that plaintiffs overstaffed the case. (See Def.’s Opp’n Br. at 21.) It notes that five senior attorneys and three junior attorneys worked on the case over the course of the litigation, and that at times “two professionals perform[ed] the same task.” (Id. at 21 & n.14.) However, a look at the “duplicative” entries flagged by the District reveals nothing improper. For instance, on June 11, 2014, the task that two professionals performed was communicating with one another. (See Ex. A to Pls.’ Mot. at 34.) Of course, 18 both attorneys could properly bill for that time. And regardless of the total number of attorneys that touched the case, the invoice reflects that a single attorney was responsible for the majority of charges at any one point in time, something the District itself acknowledges. (See Def.’s Opp’n Br. at 21 n.15.) The District’s argument for a reduction on this basis is not well-taken. CONCLUSION Accordingly, plaintiffs’ motion for attorney’s fees is GRANTED IN PART and DENIED IN PART. A separate Order accompanies this Memorandum Opinion. /s/ Ellen Segal Huvelle ELLEN SEGAL HUVELLE United States District Judge Date: August 30, 2016 19 01/14/13 JH Telephone communication with client 01/16/13 DCM Review of Intake 185.00 131.00 23.13 13.10 N ot es ar d A w A dj us te d Fe eC re di te d ed 16.38 Rate reduced to 85% USAO; Fee reduced by 20% (Pre-11/6/14) 0.125 0.125 185.00 131.00 23.13 16.38 13.10 0.125 0.125 450.00 450.00 56.25 56.25 45.00 Rate reduced to 85% USAO; Fee reduced by 20% (Pre-11/6/14) Fee reduced 20% (Pre11/6/14) 65.50 Rate reduced to 85% USAO; Fee reduced by 20% (Pre-11/6/14) 13.10 Rate reduced to 85% USAO; Fee reduced by 20% (Pre-11/6/14) 24.50 Rate reduced to Laffey (12-13); Fee reduced by 20% (Pre-11/6/14) 24.50 Rate reduced to Laffey (12-13); Fee reduced by 20% (Pre-11/6/14) 01/16/13 JH 01/18/13 JH Review of file materials regarding School District records 0.125 Telephone communication with D. Hodges Preparation of memorandum to 01/31/13 CEM file 0.125 Fe eC la im H 0.125 Preparation of Intake Preparation of correspondence to client 0.625 Telephone communication with 01/24/13 CEM client regarding records Civil Action No. 15 851 (ESH) ed H ou rs C re di te d R at eC la im ed R at eC re di te d Pe k W or 01/09/13 JH Telephone communication with client Page 1 of 104 ou rs C la im or m ed rf ls In iti a D at e Attachment to Mem. Op. [ECF No. 30] 0.125 0.125 Telephone communication with 0.125 02/01/13 CEM client Review of correspondence from 02/06/13 HBK D. Hodges 0.125 0.625 0.125 0.125 0.125 185.00 185.00 275.00 275.00 131.00 131.00 245.00 245.00 115.63 23.13 34.38 34.38 81.88 16.38 30.63 30.63 0.125 275.00 245.00 34.38 30.63 24.50 0.125 430.00 430.00 53.75 53.75 43.00 Rate reduced to Laffey (12-13); Fee reduced by 20% (Pre-11/6/14) Fee reduced 20% (Pre11/6/14) 0.375 0.375 275.00 245.00 103.13 91.88 73.50 Rate reduced to Laffey (12-13); Fee reduced by 20% (Pre-11/6/14) Review of file materials/Interoffice communication regarding police 0.375 02/07/13 HBK charges and status 0.375 430.00 430.00 161.25 161.25 129.00 Fee reduced 20% (Pre11/6/14) 122.50 Rate reduced to Laffey (12-13); Fee reduced by 20% (Pre-11/6/14) 24.50 Rate reduced to Laffey (12-13); Fee reduced by 20% (Pre-11/6/14) 49.00 Rate reduced to Laffey (12-13); Fee reduced by 20% (Pre-11/6/14) 02/06/13 CEM Review of records Telephone communications with client Review of records Preparation of correspondence to 0.625 02/07/13 CEM D. Hodges Interoffice communication with M. Buczkowski regarding 02/12/13 CEM discipline 0.125 Telephone communication with 02/21/13 CEM client regarding discipline issues 0.250 0.625 0.125 0.250 275.00 275.00 275.00 245.00 245.00 245.00 171.88 34.38 68.75 153.13 30.63 61.25 Review of file materials Update case status Preparation of correspondence to D. Hodges regarding IEP 0.125 03/02/13 CEM Meeting Telephone communication with D. Hodges regarding job and 03/08/13 CEM services 03/14/13 CEM Preparation of File Review 03/15/13 JH Telephone communication with client Interoffice communication with J. Hardy regarding scheduling 03/15/13 CEM Initial client meeting Review of records Preparation for, travel to and attendance at initial client 03/15/13 HBK meeting 0.125 0.125 0.500 0.125 0.750 3.625 0.250 0.125 0.125 0.125 0.500 0.125 0.750 3.250 275.00 275.00 275.00 275.00 275.00 185.00 275.00 430.00 245.00 245.00 245.00 245.00 245.00 131.00 245.00 430.00 68.75 34.38 34.38 34.38 137.50 23.13 206.25 1,558.75 61.25 30.63 30.63 30.63 122.50 16.38 183.75 1,397.50 N ot es ar d A w A dj us te d Fe eC re di te d Fe eC la im ed Civil Action No. 15 851 (ESH) ed H ou rs C re di te d R at eC la im ed R at eC re di te d H Telephone communication with D. Hodges regarding IEP meeting and need for evaluation Interoffice communication with H.B. Konkler-Goldsmith 0.250 03/01/13 CEM regarding IEP meeting Telephone communication with D. Hodges regarding IEP and 03/04/13 CEM evaluation Page 2 of 104 ou rs C la im or m ed W or k Pe rf ls In iti a D at e Attachment to Mem. Op. [ECF No. 30] 49.00 Rate reduced to Laffey (12-13); Fee reduced by 20% (Pre-11/6/14) 24.50 Rate reduced to Laffey (12-13); Fee reduced by 20% (Pre-11/6/14) 24.50 Rate reduced to Laffey (12-13); Fee reduced by 20% (Pre-11/6/14) 24.50 Rate reduced to Laffey (12-13); Fee reduced by 20% (Pre-11/6/14) 98.00 Rate reduced to Laffey (12-13); Fee reduced by 20% (Pre-11/6/14) 13.10 Rate reduced to 85% USAO; Fee reduced by 20% (Pre-11/6/14) 147.00 Rate reduced to Laffey (12-13); Fee reduced by 20% (Pre-11/6/14) 1,118.00 Hours reduced (travel); Fee reduced 20% (Pre11/6/14) Preparation of correspondence to 03/25/13 CEM client regarding representation 0.125 0.125 275.00 245.00 34.38 30.63 24.50 Rate reduced to Laffey (12-13); Fee reduced by 20% (Pre-11/6/14) Interoffice communication with C. McAndrews and M. Buczkowski regarding representation and Due Process 03/26/13 HBK Complaint 0.125 430.00 430.00 53.75 53.75 43.00 Fee reduced 20% (Pre11/6/14) 49.00 Rate reduced to Laffey (12-13); Fee reduced by 20% (Pre-11/6/14) 34.80 Rate reduced to 75% USAO; Fee reduced by 20% (Pre-11/6/14) 0.125 Preparation of correspondence to client regarding representation Interoffice communication with H.B. Konkler-Goldsmith and M. Buczkowski regarding same and 0.250 03/26/13 CEM Due Process Complaint 03/27/13 MM Preparation of File Chronology 0.375 0.250 0.375 275.00 140.00 245.00 116.00 68.75 52.50 61.25 43.50 Review of file materials/Interoffice communication regarding Due 04/03/13 HBK Process Request 0.250 430.00 430.00 107.50 107.50 N ot es ar d A w A dj us te d Fe eC re di te d Fe eC la im H 0.250 ed Civil Action No. 15 851 (ESH) ed H ou rs C re di te d R at eC la im ed R at eC re di te d Page 3 of 104 ou rs C la im or m ed W or k Pe rf ls In iti a D at e Attachment to Mem. Op. [ECF No. 30] 86.00 Fee reduced 20% (Pre11/6/14) Preparation of correspondence to counsel, M. Hobson, regarding update and Due Process Complaint Review of records Preparation of Due Process 04/05/13 CEM Complaint 5.125 5.125 275.00 245.00 1,409.38 1,255.63 1,004.50 Rate reduced to Laffey (12-13); Fee reduced by 20% (Pre-11/6/14) Interoffice communication with C. McAndrews regarding Due 04/08/13 HBK Process Complaint 0.250 430.00 430.00 107.50 107.50 86.00 Fee reduced 20% (Pre11/6/14) 11.60 Rate reduced to 75% USAO; Fee reduced by 20% (Pre-11/6/14) 04/08/13 MM Telephone communication with client 0.250 0.125 0.125 140.00 116.00 17.50 14.50 Interoffice communication with M. Buczkowski regarding representation Interoffice communication with H.B. Konkler-Goldsmith regarding Due Process 04/08/13 CEM Complaint 0.375 0.375 275.00 245.00 103.13 91.88 73.50 Rate reduced to Laffey (12-13); Fee reduced by 20% (Pre-11/6/14) Review of file materials/Interoffice communication regarding Due 04/09/13 HBK Process Request 0.125 0.125 430.00 430.00 53.75 53.75 43.00 Fee reduced 20% (Pre11/6/14) 11.60 Rate reduced to 75% USAO; Fee reduced by 20% (Pre-11/6/14) 26.20 Rate reduced to 85% USAO; Fee reduced by 20% (Pre-11/6/14) 73.50 Rate reduced to Laffey (12-13); Fee reduced by 20% (Pre-11/6/14) 24.50 Rate reduced to Laffey (12-13); Fee reduced by 20% (Pre-11/6/14) 98.00 Rate reduced to Laffey (12-13); Fee reduced by 20% (Pre-11/6/14) 04/09/13 MM Review of correspondence from client 0.125 04/09/13 JH Review of file materials regarding representation and Releases 0.250 Interoffice communication with H.B. Konkler-Goldsmith regarding representation and Due Process Complaint Interoffice communication with M. Buczkowski regarding 04/09/13 CEM meeting and representation 0.375 Preparation of correspondence to counsel, M. Hobson regarding 04/15/13 CEM Due Process Complaint 0.125 Review and revise Due Process 04/22/13 CEM Complaint 0.500 0.125 0.250 0.375 0.125 0.500 140.00 185.00 275.00 275.00 275.00 116.00 131.00 245.00 245.00 245.00 17.50 46.25 103.13 34.38 137.50 14.50 32.75 91.88 30.63 122.50 N ot es ar d A w A dj us te d Fe eC re di te d Fe eC la im H ed Civil Action No. 15 851 (ESH) ed H ou rs C re di te d R at eC la im ed R at eC re di te d Page 4 of 104 ou rs C la im or m ed W or k Pe rf ls In iti a D at e Attachment to Mem. Op. [ECF No. 30] Review of sample Due Process Complaint Interoffice communication with H.B. Konkler-Goldsmith regarding Due Process 04/23/13 CEM Complaint 0.250 0.250 275.00 245.00 68.75 61.25 49.00 Rate reduced to Laffey (12-13); Fee reduced by 20% (Pre-11/6/14) Interoffice communication with C. McAndrews regarding Due 04/25/13 HBK Process Complaint 0.125 0.125 430.00 430.00 53.75 53.75 43.00 Fee reduced 20% (Pre11/6/14) 24.50 Rate reduced to Laffey (12-13); Fee reduced by 20% (Pre-11/6/14) 24.50 Rate reduced to Laffey (12-13); Fee reduced by 20% (Pre-11/6/14) 49.00 Rate reduced to Laffey (12-13); Fee reduced by 20% (Pre-11/6/14) Interoffice communication with H.B. Konkler-Goldsmith regarding Due Process 04/25/13 CEM Complaint format Interoffice communication with M. Hobson regarding Due 04/26/13 CEM Process Complaint Interoffice communication with H.B. Konkler-Goldsmith regarding Due Process 04/30/13 CEM Complaint 0.125 0.125 0.250 0.125 0.125 0.250 275.00 275.00 275.00 245.00 245.00 245.00 34.38 34.38 68.75 30.63 30.63 61.25 Telephone communication with D. Hodges regarding Due 05/05/13 CEM Process Complaint 0.125 0.125 275.00 245.00 34.38 30.63 24.50 Rate reduced to Laffey (12-13); Fee reduced by 20% (Pre-11/6/14) Review of file materials/Interoffice communication regarding 05/06/13 HBK records 0.250 0.250 430.00 430.00 107.50 107.50 86.00 Fee reduced 20% (Pre11/6/14) 24.50 Rate reduced to Laffey (12-13); Fee reduced by 20% (Pre-11/6/14) Telephone communication with client regarding Due Process 05/06/13 CEM Complaint Interoffice communication with M. Buczkowski and F. Hobson regarding Due Process 05/07/13 CEM Complaint 0.125 0.125 275.00 245.00 34.38 30.63 0.125 0.125 275.00 245.00 34.38 30.63 24.50 Rate reduced to Laffey (12-13); Fee reduced by 20% (Pre-11/6/14) Interoffice communication with D.C. McAndrews, C. McAndrews and M. Buczkowski regarding Due Process 0.250 05/08/13 HBK Complaint 0.250 430.00 430.00 107.50 107.50 86.00 Fee reduced 20% (Pre11/6/14) Review and revise Due Process Complaint Interoffice communication with D.C. McAndrews, H.B. KonklerGoldsmith and M. Buczkowski 1.625 05/08/13 CEM regarding same 1.625 275.00 245.00 446.88 398.13 318.50 Rate reduced to Laffey (12-13); Fee reduced by 20% (Pre-11/6/14) Interoffice communication with C. McAndrews regarding Due 05/09/13 HBK Process Complaint 0.125 430.00 430.00 53.75 53.75 43.00 Fee reduced 20% (Pre11/6/14) 294.00 Rate reduced to Laffey (12-13); Fee reduced by 20% (Pre-11/6/14) 0.125 Interoffice communications with H.B. Konkler-Goldsmith regarding Due Process Complaint 1.500 05/09/13 CEM Review and revise same 1.500 275.00 245.00 412.50 367.50 Interoffice communication with H.B. Konkler-Goldsmith regarding Due Process 05/10/13 CEM Complaint Interoffice communication with M. Hobson regarding Due Process Complaint Revise Due Process Complaint Telephone communication with D. Hodges regarding meeting with school Interoffice communication with H.B. Konkler-Goldsmith regarding same Interoffice communication with M. Buczkowski regarding 05/13/13 CEM meeting 05/16/13 MM Telephone communication with D. Hodges 1.375 0.125 0.125 0.125 1.375 0.875 0.125 0.125 275.00 275.00 275.00 275.00 140.00 245.00 245.00 245.00 245.00 116.00 34.38 378.13 240.63 34.38 17.50 30.63 336.88 214.38 30.63 14.50 N ot es ar d A w A dj us te d Fe eC re di te d Fe eC la im ed Civil Action No. 15 851 (ESH) ed H ou rs C re di te d R at eC la im ed R at eC re di te d H 0.125 Interoffice communication with H.B. Konkler-Goldsmith regarding Due Process Complaint Interoffice communication with M. Hobson regarding same Preparation of Due Process Complaint Interoffice communications with M. Buczkowski regarding same and meeting Review of correspondence from 05/14/13 CEM D. Hodges regarding meeting 0.875 Interoffice communication with H.B. Konkler-Goldsmith 05/15/13 CEM regarding meeting Page 5 of 104 ou rs C la im or m ed W or k Pe rf ls In iti a D at e Attachment to Mem. Op. [ECF No. 30] 24.50 Rate reduced to Laffey (12-13); Fee reduced by 20% (Pre-11/6/14) 269.50 Rate reduced to Laffey (12-13); Fee reduced by 20% (Pre-11/6/14) 171.50 Rate reduced to Laffey (12-13); Fee reduced by 20% (Pre-11/6/14) 24.50 Rate reduced to Laffey (12-13); Fee reduced by 20% (Pre-11/6/14) 11.60 Rate reduced to 75% USAO; Fee reduced by 20% (Pre-11/6/14) Preparation of Due Process Complaint Review of correspondence from D. Hodges regarding meeting Preparation of correspondence to 05/16/13 CEM D. Hodges regarding same 0.875 0.875 275.00 245.00 240.63 214.38 171.50 Rate reduced to Laffey (12-13); Fee reduced by 20% (Pre-11/6/14) Review of file materials/Interoffice communication regarding job 05/17/13 HBK placement 0.125 430.00 430.00 53.75 53.75 43.00 Fee reduced 20% (Pre11/6/14) 24.50 Rate reduced to Laffey (12-13); Fee reduced by 20% (Pre-11/6/14) Interoffice communication with H.B. Konkler-Goldsmith 05/17/13 CEM regarding MDT meeting 0.125 0.125 0.125 275.00 245.00 34.38 30.63 Telephone communication with D. Hodges regarding MDT 05/20/13 CEM meeting 0.125 275.00 245.00 34.38 30.63 N ot es ar d A w A dj us te d Fe eC re di te d Fe eC la im H 0.125 ed Civil Action No. 15 851 (ESH) ed H ou rs C re di te d R at eC la im ed R at eC re di te d Page 6 of 104 ou rs C la im or m ed W or k Pe rf ls In iti a D at e Attachment to Mem. Op. [ECF No. 30] 24.50 Rate reduced to Laffey (12-13); Fee reduced by 20% (Pre-11/6/14) Review of correspondences from Student Hearing Office regarding Due Process Hearing Review of correspondence from counsel, M. Washington, 0.375 05/21/13 CEM regarding same 0.375 275.00 245.00 103.13 91.88 73.50 Rate reduced to Laffey (12-13); Fee reduced by 20% (Pre-11/6/14) Review of file materials/Interoffice communication regarding Due Process Telephone communication with 05/22/13 HBK counsel 0.750 430.00 430.00 322.50 322.50 258.00 Fee reduced 20% (Pre11/6/14) 23.20 Rate reduced to 75% USAO; Fee reduced by 20% (Pre-11/6/14) 441.00 Rate reduced to Laffey (12-13); Fee reduced by 20% (Pre-11/6/14) 23.20 Rate reduced to 75% USAO; Fee reduced by 20% (Pre-11/6/14) 13.10 Rate reduced to 85% USAO; Fee reduced by 20% (Pre-11/6/14) 05/22/13 MM 0.750 Telephone communications with client 0.250 Review of correspondence from Student Hearing Office regarding scheduling Telephone communication with counsel Interoffice communication with H.B. Konkler-Goldsmith regarding Due Process Hearing and IEE Interoffice communication with M. Hobson regarding Due Process Hearing Interoffice communication with M. Buczkowski regarding same Telephone communication with client Preparation of correspondence to Hearing Officer and M. 2.250 05/22/13 CEM Washington 05/23/13 MM Review of correspondence from Hearing Officer Massey Telephone communication with client 0.250 05/23/13 JH Review of file materials regarding Due Process 0.125 0.250 2.250 0.250 0.125 140.00 275.00 140.00 185.00 116.00 245.00 116.00 131.00 35.00 618.75 35.00 23.13 29.00 551.25 29.00 16.38 N ot es ar d A w A dj us te d Fe eC re di te d Fe eC la im H ed Civil Action No. 15 851 (ESH) ed H ou rs C re di te d R at eC la im ed R at eC re di te d Page 7 of 104 ou rs C la im or m ed W or k Pe rf ls In iti a D at e Attachment to Mem. Op. [ECF No. 30] Interoffice communication with M. Hobson regarding scheduling Due Process Hearing Interoffice communication with M. Buczkowski and J. Hardy regarding same Interoffice communication with H.B. Konkler-Goldsmith regarding Due Process Hearing Preparation of correspondence to Student Hearing Office Review of correspondence from 0.875 05/23/13 CEM Hearing Officer Massey 0.875 275.00 245.00 240.63 214.38 171.50 Rate reduced to Laffey (12-13); Fee reduced by 20% (Pre-11/6/14) Review of file materials/Interoffice communication regarding Due 05/24/13 HBK Process 0.250 430.00 430.00 107.50 107.50 86.00 Fee reduced 20% (Pre11/6/14) 0.00 Hours reduced (RSM); Fee reduced 20% (Pre11/6/14) 220.50 Hours reduced (RSM); Rate reduced to Laffey (12-13); Fee reduced 20% (Pre-11/6/14) 0.00 Hours reduced (RSM); Fee reduced 20% (Pre11/6/14) Interoffice communication with C. McAndrews regarding 05/28/13 HBK Resolution Session 0.250 0.125 Review of 2012 Jones ADR Agreement Review of correspondence from counsel, M. Washington, regarding Due Process Hearing Interoffice communications with H.B. Konkler-Goldsmith regarding Resolution Session, DCPS Response and records Review of DCPS Response to Due Process Complaint Review of correspondence from counsel regarding records Telephone communication with client regarding Resolution Session Preparation of correspondence to C. Ahaghotu regarding same Interoffice communication with M. Hobson regarding School 1.625 05/28/13 CEM District negotiations Interoffice communication with C. McAndrews regarding 05/29/13 HBK Resolution Session 0.125 0.000 1.125 0.000 430.00 275.00 430.00 430.00 245.00 430.00 53.75 446.88 53.75 0.00 275.63 0.00 Interoffice communication with H.B. Konkler-Goldsmith regarding Resolution Session and Records Request Telephone communication with C. Ahaghotu regarding Resolution Session Preparation of correspondence to 0.625 05/29/13 CEM counsel Interoffice communication with H.B. Konkler-Goldsmith regarding Resolution Meeting Preparation of correspondence to 0.500 05/31/13 CEM counsel Telephone communication with client Preparation of correspondence to C. Ahaghotu regarding 0.250 06/03/13 CEM Resolution Session Review of file materials/Interoffice communication regarding resolution Review of correspondence from 0.500 06/04/13 HBK DCPS Review of correspondence from C. Ahaghotu regarding Resolution Session Preparation of correspondence to C. Ahagotu regarding same Interoffice communication with H.B. Konkler-Goldsmith regarding Resolution Session Review of correspondence from 0.875 06/04/13 CEM D. Defino regarding same Review of correspondence from C. Ahaghotu regarding Resolution Session Preparation of correspondence to C. Ahaghotu regarding same Interoffice communication with M. Buczkowski regarding Resolution Session Review of correspondence from 0.500 06/05/13 CEM counsel 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 275.00 275.00 275.00 430.00 275.00 275.00 245.00 245.00 250.00 430.00 250.00 250.00 171.88 137.50 68.75 215.00 240.63 137.50 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 N ot es ar d A w A dj us te d Fe eC re di te d Fe eC la im ou rs C la im 0.000 ed Civil Action No. 15 851 (ESH) ed H ou rs C re di te d R at eC la im ed R at eC re di te d Page 8 of 104 H or m ed W or k Pe rf ls In iti a D at e Attachment to Mem. Op. [ECF No. 30] 0.00 Hours reduced (RSM); Rate reduced to Laffey (12-13); Fee reduced 20% (Pre-11/6/14) 0.00 Hours reduced (RSM); Rate reduced to Laffey (12-13); Fee reduced 20% (Pre-11/6/14) 0.00 Hours reduced (RSM); Rate reduced to Laffey (13-14); Fee reduced 20% (Pre-11/6/14) 0.00 Hours reduced (RSM); Fee reduced 20% (Pre11/6/14) 0.00 Hours reduced (RSM); Rate reduced to Laffey (13-14); Fee reduced 20% (Pre-11/6/14) 0.00 Hours reduced (RSM); Rate reduced to Laffey (13-14); Fee reduced 20% (Pre-11/6/14) Telephone communication with client Review of case law regarding 06/07/13 CEM compensatory education Interoffice communication with H.B. Konkler-Goldsmith 06/13/13 CEM regarding records 0.125 0.250 0.125 Preparation of correspondence to counsel, M. Washington, regarding records Review of Scheduling Order Review of file materials Update case status Telephone communication with D. Hodges regarding Resolution Session and Due Process 06/14/13 CEM Hearing 0.500 N ot es ar d A w A dj us te d Fe eC re di te d Fe eC la im ed Civil Action No. 15 851 (ESH) ed H ou rs C re di te d R at eC la im ed R at eC re di te d H Interoffice communications with M. Buczkowski regarding Resolution Session Telephone communication with 06/06/13 CEM client regarding same 0.500 06/06/13 MM Page 9 of 104 ou rs C la im or m ed W or k Pe rf ls In iti a D at e Attachment to Mem. Op. [ECF No. 30] 0.000 275.00 250.00 137.50 0.00 0.00 0.000 140.00 116.00 17.50 0.00 0.00 Hours reduced (RSM); Rate reduced to Laffey (13-14); Fee reduced 20% (Pre-11/6/14) Hours reduced (RSM); Fee reduced 20% (Pre11/6/14) 50.00 Rate reduced to Laffey (13-14); Fee reduced by 20% (Pre-11/6/14) 25.00 Rate reduced to Laffey (13-14); Fee reduced by 20% (Pre-11/6/14) 50.00 Hours reduced (RSM); Rate reduced to Laffey (13-14); Fee reduced 20% (Pre-11/6/14) 0.250 0.125 0.250 275.00 275.00 275.00 250.00 250.00 250.00 68.75 34.38 137.50 62.50 31.25 62.50 Interoffice communications with H.B. Konkler-Goldsmith regarding records and Resolution Session Review of correspondence from C. Anaghotu regarding Resolution Session Telephone communications with client regarding same Interoffice communication with J. Bradley and D. Beer regarding scheduling Review of correspondence from Hearing Officer Massey regarding pre-hearing conference Review of correspondence from counsel, M. Washington, regarding same Review of correspondence from A. Terry regarding facilitated resolution Preparation of correspondence to A. Terry regarding same Preparation of correspondence to C. Anaghotu regarding Resolution Session Preparation of correspondences to Hearing Officer regarding pre2.125 06/17/13 CEM hearing conference 1.125 275.00 250.00 584.38 281.25 225.00 Preparation of correspondences to Hearing Officer Massey regarding prehearing conference Review of correspondence from Hearing Officer regarding same Interoffice communications with H.B. Konkler-Goldsmith regarding records Review of correspondence from counsel, M. Washington, to Hearing Officer regarding 1.125 06/18/13 CEM prehearing 1.130 275.00 250.00 309.38 282.50 226.00 Review of correspondence from 06/19/13 HBK DCPS 0.500 0.000 430.00 430.00 215.00 0.00 0.00 N ot es ar d A w A dj us te d Fe eC re di te d ed Civil Action No. 15 851 (ESH) Fe eC la im ou rs C la im ed H ou rs C re di te d R at eC la im ed R at eC re di te d Page 10 of 104 H or m ed W or k Pe rf ls In iti a D at e Attachment to Mem. Op. [ECF No. 30] Hours reduced (RSM); Rate reduced to Laffey (13-14); Fee reduced 20% (Pre-11/6/14) Rate reduced to Laffey (13-14); Fee reduced by 20% (Pre-11/6/14) Hours reduced (RSM); Fee reduced 20% (Pre11/6/14) Review of correspondence from C. Ahaghotu regarding resolution session Preparation of correspondence to C. Ahaghotu regarding same Preparation of correspondence to counsel 06/20/13 CEM Facilitate resolution session 0.750 Review of correspondences from counsel, M. Washington, regarding records, Resolution Session and settlement Preparation of correspondences to counsel regarding same Interoffice communications with H.B. Konkler-Goldsmith regarding settlement, Due Process Hearing, pro hac vice and Five-Day Notices Interoffice communication with L. Mehalick regarding pro hac vice Research regarding same Telephone communications with client regarding settlement Preparation of Motion to Admit 06/21/13 CEM Pro Hac Vice 2.500 Review of correspondence from counsel, M. Washington, regarding records Interoffice communications with H.B. Konkler-Goldsmith 06/22/13 CEM regarding same 0.500 0.000 0.000 2.000 0.500 275.00 275.00 275.00 275.00 250.00 250.00 250.00 250.00 68.75 206.25 687.50 137.50 0.00 500.00 125.00 N ot es ar d A w A dj us te d ed 0.00 Fe eC re di te d H Interoffice communication with H.B. Konkler-Goldsmith regarding records Telephone communication with counsel, M. Washington, regarding records and Resolution 06/19/13 CEM Meeting 0.250 Civil Action No. 15 851 (ESH) Fe eC la im ed H ou rs C re di te d R at eC la im ed R at eC re di te d Page 11 of 104 ou rs C la im or m ed W or k Pe rf ls In iti a D at e Attachment to Mem. Op. [ECF No. 30] 0.00 Hours reduced (RSM); Rate reduced to Laffey (13-14); Fee reduced 20% (Pre-11/6/14) 0.00 Hours reduced (RSM); Rate reduced to Laffey (13-14); Fee reduced 20% (Pre-11/6/14) 400.00 Hours reduced (RSM); Rate reduced to Laffey (13-14); Fee reduced 20% (Pre-11/6/14) 100.00 Rate reduced to Laffey (13-14); Fee reduced by 20% (Pre-11/6/14) Telephone communication with 06/23/13 CEM client regarding records 0.125 0.125 275.00 250.00 34.38 31.25 25.00 Rate reduced to Laffey (13-14); Fee reduced by 20% (Pre-11/6/14) Review of file materials/Interoffice communication regarding Due Process Hearing 06/24/13 HBK Preparation for same 1.750 1.750 430.00 430.00 752.50 752.50 602.00 Fee reduced 20% (Pre11/6/14) Interoffice communications with H.B. Konkler-Goldsmith and D. Weidman regarding DC Bar Application and Due Process Hearing Telephone communication with D. Hodges regarding settlement and Due Process Hearing Telephone communications with client regarding Due Process Hearing and settlement Preparation of correspondences to counsel, M. Washington, regarding records and Facilitated Resolution Preparation of correspondence to C. Ahaghotu regarding Resolution Session Preparation of pro hac vice 1.625 06/24/13 CEM Motion Pre-Hearing Conference Review of correspondence from 1.250 06/25/13 HBK Hearing Officer Travel to school to pick up records Review of correspondence from Hearing Officer Massey regarding prehearing conference Review of Prehearing Conference Notice Review of School District records Attend prehearing conference Telephone communication with counsel Interoffice communication with H.B. Konkler-Goldsmith regarding Due Process Hearing and pro hac vice Preparation of correspondence to counsel Telephone communication with 4.125 06/25/13 CEM client Telephone communication with client Preparation of correspondence to C. Ahagotu regarding resolution 0.500 06/26/13 CEM session N ot es ar d A w A dj us te d Fe eC re di te d ed Civil Action No. 15 851 (ESH) Fe eC la im ou rs C la im ed H ou rs C re di te d R at eC la im ed R at eC re di te d Page 12 of 104 H or m ed W or k Pe rf ls In iti a D at e Attachment to Mem. Op. [ECF No. 30] 1.500 275.00 250.00 446.88 375.00 300.00 Hours reduced (RSM); Rate reduced to Laffey (13-14); Fee reduced 20% (Pre-11/6/14) 1.250 430.00 430.00 537.50 537.50 430.00 Fee reduced 20% (Pre11/6/14) 800.00 Hours reduced (travel); Rate reduced to Laffey (13-14); Fee reduced 20% (Pre-11/6/14) 0.00 Hours reduced (RSM); Rate reduced to Laffey (13-14); Fee reduced 20% (Pre-11/6/14) 4.000 0.000 275.00 275.00 250.00 250.00 1,168.75 137.50 1,000.00 0.00 Interoffice communication with C. McAndrews regarding settlement Telephone communication with counsel, M. Washington, 06/28/13 HBK regarding same Preparation of correspondence to D. Hodges regarding resolution session Preparation of correspondence to counsel 2.500 06/30/13 CEM Preparation for hearing 07/01/13 MM 0.125 Preparation for, travel to and attendance at Resolution Session Review of correspondence from counsel Review of correspondence from 6.000 07/01/13 HBK Hearing Officer 0.250 1.000 2.000 0.125 0.250 430.00 275.00 275.00 140.00 430.00 430.00 250.00 250.00 116.00 430.00 107.50 275.00 687.50 17.50 2,580.00 107.50 250.00 500.00 14.50 107.50 N ot es ar d A w A dj us te d Fe eC re di te d ed Civil Action No. 15 851 (ESH) Fe eC la im ed H ou rs C re di te d R at eC la im ed R at eC re di te d H 0.250 Interoffice communication with H.B. Konkler-Goldsmith regarding settlement and FiveDay Notices Telephone communication with counsel Review of Prehearing Order Preparation of correspondence to counsel Preparation of correspondence to 1.000 06/28/13 CEM client Telephone communication with client Page 13 of 104 ou rs C la im or m ed W or k Pe rf ls In iti a D at e Attachment to Mem. Op. [ECF No. 30] 86.00 Fee reduced 20% (Pre11/6/14) 200.00 Rate reduced to Laffey (13-14); Fee reduced by 20% (Pre-11/6/14) 400.00 Hours reduced (RSM); Rate reduced to Laffey (13-14); Fee reduced 20% (Pre-11/6/14) 11.60 Rate reduced to 75% USAO; Fee reduced by 20% (Pre-11/6/14) 86.00 Hours reduced (RSM); Fee reduced 20% (Pre11/6/14) 07/02/13 MM 07/02/13 DW Preparation of file contents 0.500 4.000 Interoffice communication with H.B. Konkler-Goldsmith regarding withdrawal of Due Process Complaint and Five-Day Notices Interoffice communication with 07/02/13 CEM M. Buczkowski regarding same 1.000 Review of correspondence from 0.125 07/03/13 HBK Hearing Officer 3.000 0.500 4.000 275.00 140.00 130.00 250.00 116.00 116.00 1,718.75 70.00 520.00 750.00 58.00 464.00 N ot es ar d A w A dj us te d Fe eC re di te d ed Civil Action No. 15 851 (ESH) Fe eC la im ed H ou rs C re di te d R at eC la im ed R at eC re di te d H Review of correspondence from D. Hodges regarding resolution session Preparation of correspondence to D. Hodges regarding same Review of correspondence from counsel Telephone communication with client Preparation of Five-Day Notices Research regarding Notices to appear and expert witnesses Interoffice communication with M. Buczkowski regarding Resolution Session Interoffice communication with H.B. Konkler-Goldsmith regarding withdrawal, S/L Pathologist and Due Process Hearing Preparation for Resolution Session Preparation of correspondence to Hearing Officer Massey regarding witnesses Preparation of correspondence to colleagues regarding withdrawal of Due Process Complaint Review of correspondence from Hearing Officer Massey regarding witnesses Review of correspondence from A. Crawford regarding Resolution Session Preparation of Motion to 6.250 07/01/13 CEM Withdraw Preparation and filing of FiveDay Notices Page 14 of 104 ou rs C la im or m ed W or k Pe rf ls In iti a D at e Attachment to Mem. Op. [ECF No. 30] 600.00 Hours reduced (RSM); Rate reduced to Laffey (13-14); Fee reduced 20% (Pre-11/6/14) 46.40 Rate reduced to 75% USAO; Fee reduced by 20% (Pre-11/6/14) 371.20 Rate reduced to 75% USAO; Fee reduced by 20% (Pre-11/6/14) 1.000 275.00 250.00 275.00 250.00 200.00 0.125 430.00 430.00 53.75 53.75 43.00 Rate reduced to Laffey (13-14); Fee reduced by 20% (Pre-11/6/14) Fee reduced 20% (Pre11/6/14) 0.130 275.00 250.00 68.75 N ot es ar d A w A dj us te d ed 32.50 Fe eC re di te d H Review of Order of Withdrawal Interoffice communication with H.B. Konkler-Goldsmith 0.250 07/03/13 CEM regarding resolution session Civil Action No. 15 851 (ESH) Fe eC la im ed H ou rs C re di te d R at eC la im ed R at eC re di te d Page 15 of 104 ou rs C la im or m ed W or k Pe rf ls In iti a D at e Attachment to Mem. Op. [ECF No. 30] 26.00 Rate reduced to Laffey (13-14); Fee reduced by 20% (Pre-11/6/14) Telephone communication with T. Sterling regarding redacted report Research S/L evaluators Telephone communication with Scottish Rite Center for Hearing and Speech regarding evaluators Telephone communication with National Speech/Language Therapy Center regarding evaluators Preparation of correspondence to National S/L Therapy Center regarding evaluators Review of correspondence from T. Sterling regarding S/L 0.875 07/09/13 CEM evaluation 0.875 275.00 250.00 240.63 218.75 175.00 Rate reduced to Laffey (13-14); Fee reduced by 20% (Pre-11/6/14) Interoffice communication with C. McAndrews regarding Due 07/10/13 HBK Process Hearing and IEE 0.125 430.00 430.00 53.75 53.75 43.00 Fee reduced 20% (Pre11/6/14) 275.00 Rate reduced to Laffey (13-14); Fee reduced by 20% (Pre-11/6/14) 50.00 Rate reduced to Laffey (13-14); Fee reduced by 20% (Pre-11/6/14) 100.00 Rate reduced to Laffey (13-14); Fee reduced by 20% (Pre-11/6/14) 0.125 Preparation of correspondence to counsel, M. Washington, regarding records Preparation of correspondence to K. Conaboy regarding S/L IEE Review of correspondences from National Speech regarding IEE Interoffice communications with H.B. Konkler-Goldsmith regarding compensatory education case law, Due Process Hearing and IEE Preparation of correspondences to National Speech regarding 1.375 07/10/13 CEM IEE Review of correspondence from K. Conaboy regarding S/L IEE Interoffice communication with H.B. Konkler-Goldsmith 0.250 07/15/13 CEM regarding same Telephone communication with client Preparation of correspondence to 07/22/13 CEM K. Conaboy regarding S/L IEE 0.500 1.375 0.250 0.500 275.00 275.00 275.00 250.00 250.00 250.00 378.13 68.75 137.50 343.75 62.50 125.00 0.125 275.00 250.00 34.38 N ot es ar d A w A dj us te d ed 31.25 Fe eC re di te d H Telephone communication with Conaboy & Assoicates regarding 0.125 07/30/13 CEM S/L IEE Civil Action No. 15 851 (ESH) Fe eC la im ed H ou rs C re di te d R at eC la im ed R at eC re di te d Page 16 of 104 ou rs C la im or m ed W or k Pe rf ls In iti a D at e Attachment to Mem. Op. [ECF No. 30] 25.00 Rate reduced to Laffey (13-14); Fee reduced by 20% (Pre-11/6/14) Compilation and review of records for evaluator Telephone communication with client Preparation of correspondence to 08/02/13 CEM K. Conaboy regarding S/L IEE 1.000 1.000 275.00 250.00 275.00 250.00 200.00 Rate reduced to Laffey (13-14); Fee reduced by 20% (Pre-11/6/14) Interoffice communication with 08/06/13 HBK C. McAndrews regarding IEE 0.125 430.00 430.00 53.75 53.75 43.00 Fee reduced 20% (Pre11/6/14) 25.00 Rate reduced to Laffey (13-14); Fee reduced by 20% (Pre-11/6/14) 125.00 Rate reduced to Laffey (13-14); Fee reduced by 20% (Pre-11/6/14) Interoffice communication with H.B. Konkler-Goldsmith 08/06/13 CEM regarding IEE 08/11/13 CEM Preparation of IEE Request 08/12/13 CEM Preparation of IEE Request Interoffice communication with C. McAndrews regarding IEE 08/14/13 HBK request 08/14/13 DW Preparation of records for conference call 0.125 0.125 0.625 0.125 0.625 275.00 275.00 250.00 250.00 34.38 171.88 31.25 156.25 0.125 0.125 275.00 250.00 34.38 31.25 25.00 Rate reduced to Laffey (13-14); Fee reduced by 20% (Pre-11/6/14) 0.250 0.250 430.00 430.00 107.50 107.50 86.00 Fee reduced 20% (Pre11/6/14) 11.60 Rate reduced to 75% USAO; Fee reduced by 20% (Pre-11/6/14) 0.125 0.125 130.00 116.00 16.25 14.50 Interoffice communication with H.B. Konkler-Goldsmith 08/14/13 CEM regarding IEE Request Interoffice communication with H.B. Konkler-Goldsmith 08/16/13 JTN regarding IEE 0.125 0.125 275.00 250.00 34.38 31.25 25.00 Rate reduced to Laffey (13-14); Fee reduced by 20% (Pre-11/6/14) 0.125 0.125 240.00 240.00 30.00 30.00 24.00 Fee reduced 20% (Pre11/6/14) Interoffice communication with 08/16/13 HBK C. McAndrews regarding IEE 0.125 0.125 430.00 430.00 53.75 53.75 43.00 Fee reduced 20% (Pre11/6/14) 23.20 Rate reduced to 75% USAO; Fee reduced by 20% (Pre-11/6/14) 75.00 Rate reduced to Laffey (13-14); Fee reduced by 20% (Pre-11/6/14) 08/16/13 MM Revise and file IEE request 0.250 Preparation of IEE request Interoffice communication with M. Buczkowski regarding same Preparation of correspondence to counsel Interoffice communication with H.B. Konkler-Goldsmith 0.375 08/16/13 CEM regarding IEE 0.250 0.375 140.00 275.00 116.00 250.00 35.00 103.13 29.00 93.75 0.875 275.00 250.00 240.63 N ot es ar d A w A dj us te d ed 218.75 Fe eC re di te d H Review of correspondence from K. Conaboy regarding IEE Telephone communication with client regarding same Telephone communication with D. Hodges regarding client contact Preparation of correspondence to client regarding communication and IEE Interoffice communication with M. Buczkowski regarding client communication Preparation of correspondence to 0.875 08/26/13 CEM K. Conaboy regarding IEE Civil Action No. 15 851 (ESH) Fe eC la im ed H ou rs C re di te d R at eC la im ed R at eC re di te d Page 17 of 104 ou rs C la im or m ed W or k Pe rf ls In iti a D at e Attachment to Mem. Op. [ECF No. 30] 175.00 Rate reduced to Laffey (13-14); Fee reduced by 20% (Pre-11/6/14) Review of correspondence from K. Marcus regarding IEE request Preparation of correspondence to D. Hodges regarding client communication Review of correspondence from D. Hodges regarding client 0.500 09/03/13 CEM contact 0.500 275.00 250.00 137.50 125.00 100.00 Rate reduced to Laffey (13-14); Fee reduced by 20% (Pre-11/6/14) Interoffice communication with C. McAndrews regarding client 09/04/13 HBK contact and IEE request 0.125 430.00 430.00 53.75 53.75 43.00 Fee reduced 20% (Pre11/6/14) 75.00 Rate reduced to Laffey (13-14); Fee reduced by 20% (Pre-11/6/14) 50.00 Rate reduced to Laffey (13-14); Fee reduced by 20% (Pre-11/6/14) 50.00 Rate reduced to Laffey (13-14); Fee reduced by 20% (Pre-11/6/14) 0.125 Preparation of correspondence to D. Hodges regarding client contact Review of correspondence from D. Hodges regarding client contact Interoffice communication with H.B. Konkler-Goldsmith regarding client contact and IEE 0.375 09/04/13 CEM request Interoffice communication with R. Paul regarding client contact information Review of correspondence from D. Hodges regarding client communication Preparation of correspondence to 0.250 09/05/13 CEM D. Hodges regarding same Telephone communication with client Telephone communication with D. Hodges regarding contact 09/09/13 CEM with client 0.250 0.375 0.250 0.250 275.00 275.00 275.00 250.00 250.00 250.00 103.13 68.75 68.75 93.75 62.50 62.50 Telephone communication with D. Hodges regarding client 09/12/13 CEM communication 09/13/13 MM Interoffice communication with C. McAndrews regarding S/L evaluation 09/16/13 MM Telephone communication with D. Hodges regarding client 09/24/13 CEM communication Telephone communication with 09/26/13 CEM client 0.125 0.250 0.125 0.250 0.125 0.125 0.125 0.250 0.125 0.250 275.00 140.00 275.00 140.00 275.00 275.00 250.00 116.00 250.00 116.00 250.00 250.00 34.38 17.50 34.38 35.00 34.38 68.75 31.25 14.50 31.25 29.00 31.25 62.50 N ot es ar d A w A dj us te d Fe eC re di te d ed Civil Action No. 15 851 (ESH) Fe eC la im ed H ou rs C re di te d R at eC la im ed R at eC re di te d H 0.125 Interoffice communication with M. Buczkowski regarding client communication, IEE Request 0.125 09/13/13 CEM and S/L IEE Telephone communication with client Page 18 of 104 ou rs C la im or m ed W or k Pe rf ls In iti a D at e Attachment to Mem. Op. [ECF No. 30] 25.00 Rate reduced to Laffey (13-14); Fee reduced by 20% (Pre-11/6/14) 11.60 Rate reduced to 75% USAO; Fee reduced by 20% (Pre-11/6/14) 25.00 Rate reduced to Laffey (13-14); Fee reduced by 20% (Pre-11/6/14) 23.20 Rate reduced to 75% USAO; Fee reduced by 20% (Pre-11/6/14) 25.00 Rate reduced to Laffey (13-14); Fee reduced by 20% (Pre-11/6/14) 50.00 Rate reduced to Laffey (13-14); Fee reduced by 20% (Pre-11/6/14) Interoffice communication with H.B. Konkler-Goldsmith 10/02/13 CEM regarding IEE request 0.125 0.125 275.00 250.00 34.38 31.25 25.00 Rate reduced to Laffey (13-14); Fee reduced by 20% (Pre-11/6/14) Intraoffice communication with 10/08/13 HBK C. McAndrews regarding IEE 0.125 0.125 430.00 430.00 53.75 53.75 43.00 Fee reduced 20% (Pre11/6/14) 75.00 Rate reduced to Laffey (13-14); Fee reduced by 20% (Pre-11/6/14) 125.00 Rate reduced to Laffey (13-14); Fee reduced by 20% (Pre-11/6/14) Preparation of correspondence to K. Marcus and M. Washington regarding IEE Review of correspondence from M. Washington regarding IEE Request Interoffice communication with H.B. Konkler-Goldsmith 0.375 10/08/13 CEM regarding IEE Telephone communication with client regarding IEE Preparation of correspondence to counsel, M. Washington, regarding same Preparation of correspondences to K. Conaboy regarding S/L evaluation Review of file materials K. 0.625 10/09/13 CEM Conaboy regarding same 0.375 0.625 275.00 275.00 250.00 250.00 103.13 171.88 93.75 156.25 0.125 Preparation of correspondence to 0.125 10/23/13 CEM counsel Telephone communication with client Telephone communication with D. Hodges regarding 10/24/13 CEM compensatory education 0.250 N ot es ar d A w A dj us te d Fe eC re di te d ed Civil Action No. 15 851 (ESH) Fe eC la im ed H ou rs C re di te d R at eC la im ed R at eC re di te d H Interoffice communication with H.B. Konkler-Goldsmith regarding FBA Telephone communications with client regarding evaluation Preparation of correspondence to counsel, M. Washington, regarding same Review of correspondence from 0.750 10/10/13 CEM counsel regarding evaluation Intraoffice communication with C. McAndrews regarding IEE 0.125 10/14/13 HBK request Interoffice communication with H.B. Konkler-Goldsmith 10/14/13 CEM regarding IEE Request Page 19 of 104 ou rs C la im or m ed W or k Pe rf ls In iti a D at e Attachment to Mem. Op. [ECF No. 30] 0.750 275.00 250.00 206.25 187.50 150.00 Rate reduced to Laffey (13-14); Fee reduced by 20% (Pre-11/6/14) 0.125 430.00 430.00 53.75 53.75 43.00 Fee reduced 20% (Pre11/6/14) 25.00 Rate reduced to Laffey (13-14); Fee reduced by 20% (Pre-11/6/14) 25.00 Rate reduced to Laffey (13-14); Fee reduced by 20% (Pre-11/6/14) 50.00 Rate reduced to Laffey (13-14); Fee reduced by 20% (Pre-11/6/14) 0.125 0.125 0.250 275.00 275.00 275.00 250.00 250.00 250.00 34.38 34.38 68.75 31.25 31.25 62.50 Review of correspondence from Conaboy & Assoc. regarding S/L IEE Preparation of correspondence to Conaboy & Assoc. regarding same Interoffice communication with M. Buczkowski regarding S/L 0.250 10/28/13 CEM IEE 0.250 275.00 250.00 68.75 62.50 50.00 Rate reduced to Laffey (13-14); Fee reduced by 20% (Pre-11/6/14) Intraoffice communication with 10/30/13 HBK C. McAndrews regarding IEE 0.125 430.00 430.00 53.75 53.75 43.00 Fee reduced 20% (Pre11/6/14) 100.00 Rate reduced to Laffey (13-14); Fee reduced by 20% (Pre-11/6/14) 25.00 Rate reduced to Laffey (13-14); Fee reduced by 20% (Pre-11/6/14) 0.125 Review of correspondence from K. Conaboy regarding IEE Intraoffice communication with H.B. Konkler-Goldsmith regarding same Research regarding IEE providers Preparation of correspondence to 0.500 10/30/13 CEM Dr. Iseman regarding IEE Telephone communication with 11/01/13 CEM client 0.125 0.500 0.125 275.00 275.00 250.00 250.00 137.50 34.38 125.00 31.25 Telephone communication with client regarding IEE and behaviors Preparation of correspondence to K. Marcus regarding FBA and IEE Review of records regarding 0.750 11/08/13 CEM current school year Telephone communications with D. Hodges regarding contact 0.250 11/12/13 CEM information Intraoffice communication with H.B. Konkler-Goldsmith regarding communication with client and IEE Preparation of correspondence to K. Marcus regarding IEE 0.375 11/13/13 CEM Request Intraoffice communication with C. McAndrews regarding S/L 0.125 11/20/13 HBK IEE Review of S/L IEE Intraoffice communication with H.B. Konkler-Goldsmith regarding same Preparation of correspondence to 11/20/13 CEM K. Conaboy regarding S/L IEE 0.750 Review of correspondence from 11/21/13 CEM K. Conaboy regarding S/L IEE 0.125 11/25/13 PW Intraoffice communication with P. Wedderburn regarding Due 11/25/13 CEM Process Complaint Telephone communication with client regarding Due Process 12/06/13 CEM Complaint 2.000 0.125 0.125 0.375 0.750 0.250 275.00 275.00 275.00 250.00 250.00 250.00 103.13 206.25 68.75 93.75 187.50 62.50 N ot es ar d A w A dj us te d Fe eC re di te d ed Civil Action No. 15 851 (ESH) Fe eC la im ed H ou rs C re di te d R at eC la im ed R at eC re di te d H Telephone communication with client regarding evaluation and school Telephone communication with D. Hodges regarding contact with client Preparation of correspondence to K. Conaboy regarding S/L 0.375 11/05/13 CEM evaluation Preparation of Due Process Complaint Page 20 of 104 ou rs C la im or m ed W or k Pe rf ls In iti a D at e Attachment to Mem. Op. [ECF No. 30] 75.00 Rate reduced to Laffey (13-14); Fee reduced by 20% (Pre-11/6/14) 150.00 Rate reduced to Laffey (13-14); Fee reduced by 20% (Pre-11/6/14) 50.00 Rate reduced to Laffey (13-14); Fee reduced by 20% (Pre-11/6/14) 0.375 275.00 250.00 103.13 93.75 75.00 Rate reduced to Laffey (13-14); Fee reduced by 20% (Pre-11/6/14) 0.125 430.00 430.00 53.75 53.75 43.00 Fee reduced 20% (Pre11/6/14) 150.00 Rate reduced to Laffey (13-14); Fee reduced by 20% (Pre-11/6/14) 25.00 Rate reduced to Laffey (13-14); Fee reduced by 20% (Pre-11/6/14) 185.60 Rate reduced to 75% USAO; Fee reduced by 20% (Pre-11/6/14) 25.00 Rate reduced to Laffey (13-14); Fee reduced by 20% (Pre-11/6/14) 25.00 Rate reduced to Laffey (13-14); Fee reduced by 20% (Pre-11/6/14) 0.750 0.125 2.000 0.125 0.125 275.00 275.00 130.00 275.00 275.00 250.00 250.00 116.00 250.00 250.00 206.25 34.38 260.00 34.38 34.38 187.50 31.25 232.00 31.25 31.25 N ot es ar d A w A dj us te d ed Fe eC re di te d H Civil Action No. 15 851 (ESH) Fe eC la im ed H ou rs C re di te d R at eC la im ed R at eC re di te d Pe k W or Preparation of Due Process 12/16/13 CEM Complaint Intraoffice communication with C. McAndrews regarding 01/08/14 HBK evaluation Page 21 of 104 ou rs C la im or m ed rf ls In iti a D at e Attachment to Mem. Op. [ECF No. 30] 0.625 0.625 275.00 250.00 171.88 156.25 125.00 Rate reduced to Laffey (13-14); Fee reduced by 20% (Pre-11/6/14) 0.125 0.125 430.00 430.00 53.75 53.75 43.00 Fee reduced 20% (Pre11/6/14) Intraoffice communication with H.B. Konkler-Goldsmith 01/08/14 CEM regarding private evaluation 0.125 0.125 275.00 250.00 34.38 31.25 25.00 01/10/14 HBK Review of records 0.250 0.250 430.00 430.00 107.50 107.50 86.00 Rate reduced to Laffey (13-14); Fee reduced by 20% (Pre-11/6/14) Fee reduced 20% (Pre11/6/14) 25.00 Rate reduced to Laffey (13-14); Fee reduced by 20% (Pre-11/6/14) 50.00 Rate reduced to Laffey (13-14); Fee reduced by 20% (Pre-11/6/14) Intraoffice communication with P. Wedderburn regarding 01/10/14 CEM evaluations Review of evaluations Intraoffice communication with H.B. Konkler-Goldsmith 01/11/14 CEM regarding IEE 0.125 0.250 Telephone communication with 01/17/14 CEM D. Hodges regarding evaluation 0.125 Intraoffice communication with C. McAndrews regarding 0.125 01/20/14 HBK evaluation Intraoffice communication with H.B. Konkler-Goldsmith 01/20/14 CEM regarding evaluation Preparation of Due Process 01/24/14 CEM Complaint Preparation of Due Process 01/27/14 CEM Complaint Review and revise Due Process 01/28/14 HMH Complaint 0.125 0.250 0.500 0.375 Intraoffice communication with H. Hulse regarding Due Process Complaint revisions Telephone communications with client regarding Due Process Complaint, progress, IEP Meeting and FBA Preparation of Due Process 1.375 01/29/14 CEM Complaint 0.125 0.250 275.00 275.00 250.00 250.00 34.38 68.75 31.25 62.50 0.125 275.00 250.00 34.38 31.25 25.00 Rate reduced to Laffey (13-14); Fee reduced by 20% (Pre-11/6/14) 0.125 430.00 430.00 53.75 53.75 43.00 Fee reduced 20% (Pre11/6/14) 25.00 Rate reduced to Laffey (13-14); Fee reduced by 20% (Pre-11/6/14) 50.00 Rate reduced to Laffey (13-14); Fee reduced by 20% (Pre-11/6/14) 100.00 Rate reduced to Laffey (13-14); Fee reduced by 20% (Pre-11/6/14) 108.00 Rate reduced to Laffey (13-14); Fee reduced by 20% (Pre-11/6/14) 275.00 Rate reduced to Laffey (13-14); Fee reduced by 20% (Pre-11/6/14) 0.125 0.250 0.500 0.375 1.375 275.00 275.00 275.00 380.00 275.00 250.00 250.00 250.00 360.00 250.00 34.38 68.75 137.50 142.50 378.13 31.25 62.50 125.00 135.00 343.75 Review of correspondence from client Preparation of correspondence to 0.375 02/04/14 CEM client Intraoffice communication with D. Dubose regarding scheduling resolution meeting Telephone communication with T. Ingram regarding scheduling 0.250 02/05/14 CEM resolution meeting Telephone communication with T. Ingram regarding scheduling 02/07/14 CEM RSM Telephone communication with 02/08/14 CEM client 0.375 0.125 0.125 Telephone communications with client regarding IEP Meeting, behavior, RSM and discipline Intraoffice communication with H.B. Konkler-Goldsmith regarding IEP Meeting Review of correspondence from T. Ingram regarding RSM Preparation of correspondence to 0.500 02/10/14 CEM T. Ingram regarding same 0.125 0.375 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.130 275.00 275.00 275.00 275.00 275.00 275.00 275.00 250.00 250.00 250.00 250.00 250.00 250.00 250.00 103.13 103.13 68.75 103.13 34.38 34.38 137.50 31.25 93.75 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 32.50 N ot es ar d A w A dj us te d Fe eC re di te d ed Civil Action No. 15 851 (ESH) Fe eC la im ed H ou rs C re di te d R at eC la im ed R at eC re di te d H Telephone communication with DCPS Scheduler regarding RSM Review of correspondence from SHO regarding Hearing Officer Appointment Notice Review of correspondence from Hearing Officer Massey 0.375 02/03/14 CEM regarding Initial Order Telephone communication with client Telephone communication with T. Ingram regarding scheduling 02/06/14 CEM resolution meeting Page 22 of 104 ou rs C la im or m ed W or k Pe rf ls In iti a D at e Attachment to Mem. Op. [ECF No. 30] 25.00 Hours reduced (RSM); Rate reduced to Laffey (13-14); Fee reduced 20% (Pre-11/6/14) 75.00 Rate reduced to Laffey (13-14); Fee reduced by 20% (Pre-11/6/14) 0.00 Hours reduced (RSM); Rate reduced to Laffey (13-14); Fee reduced 20% (Pre-11/6/14) 0.00 Hours reduced (RSM); Rate reduced to Laffey (13-14); Fee reduced 20% (Pre-11/6/14) 0.00 Hours reduced (RSM); Rate reduced to Laffey (13-14); Fee reduced 20% (Pre-11/6/14) 0.00 Hours reduced (RSM); Rate reduced to Laffey (13-14); Fee reduced 20% (Pre-11/6/14) 26.00 Hours reduced (RSM); Rate reduced to Laffey (13-14); Fee reduced 20% (Pre-11/6/14) Review of DCPS Response to Due Process Complaint Review of text messages from teacher to parent regarding 02/12/14 CEM behavior Review of correspondence from client regarding RSM Telephone communication with client regarding same Preparation of correspondence to 02/14/14 CEM client regarding RSM 0.375 Telephone communication with client regarding Resolution 02/18/14 DD Meeting 0.125 02/19/14 DD 0.250 Telephone communication with client Preparation of correspondence to client 0.125 Intraoffice communication with D. Dubose regarding scheduling resolution meeting Review of correspondence from T. Ingram regarding scheduling Due Process Hearing Preparation of correspondence to 02/19/14 CEM T. Ingram regarding same 0.375 02/20/14 DD Telephone communications with client regarding Resolution Meeting 0.250 Intraoffice communication with D. Dubose regarding RSM Telephone communication with client regarding same and IEP Meeting Preparation of correspondence to 02/20/14 CEM T. Ingram regarding RSM 0.375 0.250 0.000 275.00 275.00 250.00 250.00 68.75 68.75 62.50 0.00 N ot es ar d A w A dj us te d Fe eC re di te d ed Civil Action No. 15 851 (ESH) Fe eC la im ed H ou rs C re di te d R at eC la im ed R at eC re di te d H 0.250 Preparation of correspondence to T. Ingram regarding RSM Telephone communication with 02/13/14 CEM client regarding same 0.250 Intraoffice communication with D. Dubose regarding RSM Telephone communication with D. Hodges regarding Due Process Complaint and 02/18/14 CEM discipline Page 23 of 104 ou rs C la im or m ed W or k Pe rf ls In iti a D at e Attachment to Mem. Op. [ECF No. 30] 50.00 Rate reduced to Laffey (13-14); Fee reduced by 20% (Pre-11/6/14) 0.00 Hours reduced (RSM); Rate reduced to Laffey (13-14); Fee reduced 20% (Pre-11/6/14) 0.000 275.00 250.00 103.13 0.00 0.00 0.000 145.00 116.00 18.13 0.00 0.00 Hours reduced (RSM); Rate reduced to Laffey (13-14); Fee reduced 20% (Pre-11/6/14) Hours reduced (RSM); Fee reduced 20% (Pre11/6/14) 26.00 Hours reduced (RSM); Rate reduced to Laffey (13-14); Fee reduced 20% (Pre-11/6/14) 0.00 Hours reduced (RSM); Fee reduced 20% (Pre11/6/14) 25.00 Hours reduced (RSM); Rate reduced to Laffey (13-14); Fee reduced 20% (Pre-11/6/14) 0.00 Hours reduced (RSM); Fee reduced 20% (Pre11/6/14) 0.00 Hours reduced (RSM); Rate reduced to Laffey (13-14); Fee reduced 20% (Pre-11/6/14) 0.130 0.000 0.125 0.000 0.000 275.00 145.00 275.00 145.00 275.00 250.00 116.00 250.00 116.00 250.00 68.75 18.13 103.13 36.25 103.13 32.50 0.00 31.25 0.00 0.00 Intraoffice communication with H.B. Konkler-Goldsmith 02/21/14 CEM regarding RSM and IEP 02/26/14 DD Telephone communication with DCPS resolution scheduler to confirm 2/27 session Intraoffice communication with D. Dubose regarding resolution meeting Telephone communication with 02/26/14 CEM client 0.125 0.250 Telephone communication with M. Smith regarding RSM Telephone communication with client 02/27/14 CEM Travel to and attendance at RSM 2.375 Review of correspondence from Hearing Officer Massey regarding Prehearing Conference Review of correspondence from counsel Preparation of correspondence to Hearing Officer Massey regarding Prehearing Conference Intraoffice communication with H.B. Konkler-Goldsmith 0.625 02/28/14 CEM regarding attorneys fees Preparation of correspondence to M. Smith regarding request for 0.500 03/01/14 CEM FBA and increase in IEE rate Review of correspondence from 03/05/14 CEM DCPS regarding RSM 0.125 Review of correspondences from Hearing Officer Massey regarding Prehearing Conference Review of correspondence from counsel, L. Smalls, regarding same Preparation of correspondence to Hearing Officer regarding 0.500 03/06/14 CEM Prehearing Conference 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.625 0.500 0.000 0.500 275.00 145.00 275.00 275.00 275.00 275.00 275.00 275.00 250.00 116.00 250.00 250.00 250.00 250.00 250.00 250.00 34.38 18.13 68.75 653.13 171.88 137.50 34.38 137.50 0.00 0.00 0.00 156.25 125.00 0.00 125.00 N ot es ar d A w A dj us te d ed 0.00 Fe eC re di te d H 0.125 Civil Action No. 15 851 (ESH) Fe eC la im ed H ou rs C re di te d R at eC la im ed R at eC re di te d Page 24 of 104 ou rs C la im or m ed W or k Pe rf ls In iti a D at e Attachment to Mem. Op. [ECF No. 30] 0.00 Hours reduced (RSM); Rate reduced to Laffey (13-14); Fee reduced 20% (Pre-11/6/14) 0.00 Hours reduced (RSM); Fee reduced 20% (Pre11/6/14) 0.00 Hours reduced (RSM); Rate reduced to Laffey (13-14); Fee reduced 20% (Pre-11/6/14) 0.00 Hours reduced (RSM); Rate reduced to Laffey (13-14); Fee reduced 20% (Pre-11/6/14) 125.00 Rate reduced to Laffey (13-14); Fee reduced by 20% (Pre-11/6/14) 100.00 Rate reduced to Laffey (13-14); Fee reduced by 20% (Pre-11/6/14) 0.00 Hours reduced (RSM); Rate reduced to Laffey (13-14); Fee reduced 20% (Pre-11/6/14) 100.00 Rate reduced to Laffey (13-14); Fee reduced by 20% (Pre-11/6/14) Review of correspondence from counsel, L. Smalls, regarding Prehearing Conference Review of correspondence from Hearing Officer Massey 0.250 03/07/14 CEM regarding same Review of correspondence from Hearing Officer regarding Prehearing Conference Notice Preparation of correspondence regarding Prehearing Conference 0.375 03/11/14 CEM Order Prehearing Conference Preparation of correspondence to counsel Preparation of correspondence to Hearing Officer Massey and L. Smalls regarding witnesses Review of correspondence from 0.500 03/12/14 CEM counsel Preparation of correspondence to 03/13/14 CEM colleagues regarding IEE rates 0.250 Review of Prehearing Conference Order Review of correspondences from Hearing Officer Massey regarding same Preparation of Motion for Summary Judgment Review of correspondences from counsel, L. Smalls, regarding evaluations and Prehearing Conference Order Preparation of correspondences to Hearing Officer regarding Prehearing Conference Order Research regarding DC IEE providers Intraoffice communication with D. Dubose regarding redacted reports Intraoffice communication with H.B. Konkler-Goldsmith regarding evaluation, Due Process Hearing and withdrawal 2.125 03/14/14 CEM of Due Process Complaint 0.250 0.375 0.500 0.250 2.130 275.00 275.00 275.00 275.00 275.00 250.00 250.00 250.00 250.00 250.00 68.75 103.13 137.50 68.75 584.38 62.50 93.75 125.00 62.50 532.50 N ot es ar d A w A dj us te d Fe eC re di te d ed Civil Action No. 15 851 (ESH) Fe eC la im ou rs C la im ed H ou rs C re di te d R at eC la im ed R at eC re di te d Page 25 of 104 H or m ed W or k Pe rf ls In iti a D at e Attachment to Mem. Op. [ECF No. 30] 50.00 Rate reduced to Laffey (13-14); Fee reduced by 20% (Pre-11/6/14) 75.00 Rate reduced to Laffey (13-14); Fee reduced by 20% (Pre-11/6/14) 100.00 Rate reduced to Laffey (13-14); Fee reduced by 20% (Pre-11/6/14) 50.00 Rate reduced to Laffey (13-14); Fee reduced by 20% (Pre-11/6/14) 426.00 Rate reduced to Laffey (13-14); Fee reduced by 20% (Pre-11/6/14) 0.750 275.00 250.00 206.25 N ot es ar d A w A dj us te d ed 187.50 Fe eC re di te d H Review of correspondence from Hearing Officer Massey regarding Prehearing Order Telephone communication with counsel, L. Smalls, regarding withdrawal Telephone communication with client regarding same Preparation of correspondence to client regarding evaluations and withdrawal Preparation of correspondence to 0.750 03/18/14 CEM Dr. Levisohn regarding IEE Civil Action No. 15 851 (ESH) Fe eC la im ed H ou rs C re di te d R at eC la im ed R at eC re di te d Page 26 of 104 ou rs C la im or m ed W or k Pe rf ls In iti a D at e Attachment to Mem. Op. [ECF No. 30] 150.00 Rate reduced to Laffey (13-14); Fee reduced by 20% (Pre-11/6/14) Telephone communication with client regarding withdrawal Review of correspondence from Dr. Levisohn regarding evaluation Telephone communication with Dr. Levisohn regarding same Preparation of Motion to Withdraw Intraoffice communication with H.B. Konkler-Goldsmith 0.625 03/19/14 CEM regarding same 0.625 275.00 250.00 171.88 156.25 125.00 Rate reduced to Laffey (13-14); Fee reduced by 20% (Pre-11/6/14) Review of file materials/Intraoffice communication regarding 03/21/14 HBK suspension 0.125 430.00 430.00 53.75 53.75 43.00 Fee reduced 20% (Pre11/6/14) 0.125 Telephone communication with client Intraoffice communication with H.B. Konkler-Goldsmith 03/21/14 CEM regarding suspension 0.250 0.250 275.00 250.00 68.75 62.50 50.00 Rate reduced to Laffey (13-14); Fee reduced by 20% (Pre-11/6/14) Review of file materials/Intraoffice communication regarding 03/24/14 HBK Motion to Dismiss 0.125 0.125 430.00 430.00 53.75 53.75 43.00 Fee reduced 20% (Pre11/6/14) 125.00 Rate reduced to Laffey (13-14); Fee reduced by 20% (Pre-11/6/14) Telephone communications with counsel, L. Smalls, regarding behavior and Due Process Hearing Preparation of correspondence to counsel regarding same Intraoffice communication with H.B. Konkler-Goldsmith regarding Motion to Withdraw 0.625 03/24/14 CEM Preparation of same 0.625 275.00 250.00 171.88 156.25 Review of file materials/Intraoffice communication regarding 03/25/14 HBK Permission to Evaluate 03/25/14 DD Submission of Motion 0.125 Review of correspondence from client regarding communication Preparation of correspondence to client regarding same Telephone communications with client regarding suspension Intraoffice communication with H.B. Konkler-Goldsmith regarding Permission to Evaluate 03/25/14 CEM Review of Order 1.000 Review of correspondence from counsel, L. Smalls, regarding FBA Intraoffice communication with H.B. Konkler-Goldsmith regarding Permission to Evaluate Telephone communication with 03/26/14 CEM client regarding suspension 0.375 0.125 0.125 1.000 0.375 430.00 145.00 275.00 275.00 430.00 116.00 250.00 250.00 53.75 18.13 275.00 103.13 14.50 250.00 93.75 N ot es ar d A w A dj us te d ed 53.75 Fe eC re di te d H 0.125 Civil Action No. 15 851 (ESH) Fe eC la im ed H ou rs C re di te d R at eC la im ed R at eC re di te d Page 27 of 104 ou rs C la im or m ed W or k Pe rf ls In iti a D at e Attachment to Mem. Op. [ECF No. 30] 43.00 Fee reduced 20% (Pre11/6/14) 11.60 Rate reduced to 75% USAO; Fee reduced by 20% (Pre-11/6/14) 200.00 Rate reduced to Laffey (13-14); Fee reduced by 20% (Pre-11/6/14) 75.00 Rate reduced to Laffey (13-14); Fee reduced by 20% (Pre-11/6/14) Review of correspondence from counsel, L. Smalls, regarding suspension Telephone communication with client regarding same Preparation of correspondence to client regarding Consent to 03/27/14 CEM Evaluate 0.500 0.500 275.00 250.00 137.50 125.00 100.00 Rate reduced to Laffey (13-14); Fee reduced by 20% (Pre-11/6/14) Review of file materials/Intraoffice communication regarding 03/28/14 HBK suspensions 0.125 430.00 430.00 53.75 53.75 43.00 Fee reduced 20% (Pre11/6/14) 25.00 Rate reduced to Laffey (13-14); Fee reduced by 20% (Pre-11/6/14) 50.00 Rate reduced to Laffey (13-14); Fee reduced by 20% (Pre-11/6/14) Intraoffice communication with H.B. Konkler-Goldsmith 03/28/14 CEM regarding suspensions 0.125 0.125 Telephone communication with Dr. Levisohn regarding IEE Preparation of correspondence to 04/07/14 CEM Dr. Levisohn regarding same 0.250 0.125 0.250 275.00 275.00 250.00 250.00 34.38 68.75 31.25 62.50 0.125 Review of correspondences from counsel, L. Smalls, regarding 0.250 04/10/14 CEM IEE and behavior incidents Review of discipline referral forms Telephone communication with L. Levisohn regarding evaluation Telephone communication with 0.750 04/11/14 CEM client Review of correspondence to School District regarding 0.250 04/15/14 JTN behavioral issues Preparation of correspondence to Dr. Levisohn regarding IEE Intraoffice communication with H.B. Konkler-Goldsmith regarding payment for same Preparation of correspondences to counsel, L. Smalls, regarding 1.375 04/15/14 CEM behavior Research regarding behavior 04/20/14 CEM assessment and intervention 0.250 N ot es ar d A w A dj us te d Fe eC re di te d ed Civil Action No. 15 851 (ESH) Fe eC la im ed H ou rs C re di te d R at eC la im ed R at eC re di te d H Review of correspondence from Dr. Levisohn regarding IEE Review of correspondence from client regarding behavior Telephone communication with client Telephone communication with Dr. Levisohn regarding IEE Preparation of correspondence to 0.875 04/08/14 CEM counsel Intraoffice communication with C. McAndrews regarding 0.125 04/09/14 HBK behavior Intraoffice communication with H.B. Konkler-Goldsmith 04/09/14 CEM regarding behavior Page 28 of 104 ou rs C la im or m ed W or k Pe rf ls In iti a D at e Attachment to Mem. Op. [ECF No. 30] 0.875 275.00 250.00 240.63 218.75 175.00 Rate reduced to Laffey (13-14); Fee reduced by 20% (Pre-11/6/14) 0.125 430.00 430.00 53.75 53.75 43.00 Fee reduced 20% (Pre11/6/14) 25.00 Rate reduced to Laffey (13-14); Fee reduced by 20% (Pre-11/6/14) 50.00 Rate reduced to Laffey (13-14); Fee reduced by 20% (Pre-11/6/14) 0.125 0.250 275.00 275.00 250.00 250.00 34.38 68.75 31.25 62.50 0.750 275.00 250.00 206.25 187.50 150.00 Rate reduced to Laffey (13-14); Fee reduced by 20% (Pre-11/6/14) 0.250 240.00 240.00 60.00 60.00 48.00 Fee reduced 20% (Pre11/6/14) 275.00 Rate reduced to Laffey (13-14); Fee reduced by 20% (Pre-11/6/14) 50.00 Rate reduced to Laffey (13-14); Fee reduced by 20% (Pre-11/6/14) 1.375 0.250 275.00 275.00 250.00 250.00 378.13 68.75 343.75 62.50 Research regarding behavior 04/21/14 CEM assessment and intervention 0.125 0.125 275.00 250.00 34.38 31.25 25.00 Rate reduced to Laffey (13-14); Fee reduced by 20% (Pre-11/6/14) Review of file materials/Intraoffice communication regarding 04/23/14 HBK evaluation 0.250 0.250 430.00 430.00 107.50 107.50 86.00 Fee reduced 20% (Pre11/6/14) Review of correspondence from L. Levisohn regarding IEE Review of correspondence from D. Topolosky regarding IEE Preparation of correspondence to L. Levisohn and D. Topolosky 0.375 04/24/14 CEM regarding IEE 0.250 0.375 275.00 275.00 250.00 250.00 68.75 103.13 93.75 N ot es ar d A w A dj us te d ed 62.50 Fe eC re di te d H Review of correspondences from L. Levisohn regarding evaluation Preparation of correspondence to 0.250 04/23/14 CEM L. Levisohn regarding same Civil Action No. 15 851 (ESH) Fe eC la im ed H ou rs C re di te d R at eC la im ed R at eC re di te d Page 29 of 104 ou rs C la im or m ed W or k Pe rf ls In iti a D at e Attachment to Mem. Op. [ECF No. 30] 50.00 Rate reduced to Laffey (13-14); Fee reduced by 20% (Pre-11/6/14) 75.00 Rate reduced to Laffey (13-14); Fee reduced by 20% (Pre-11/6/14) Review of correspondence from A. McLaughlin regarding observation Preparation of correspondence to A. McLaughlin regarding same Telephone communication with Dr. Topolosky regarding psychoeducational testing Preparation of correspondence to Dr. Topolosky regarding same Preparation of correspondence to Dr. Levisohn and Dr. Topolosky regarding IEE Intraoffice communication with 04/28/14 CEM D. Dubose regarding IEE records 1.000 1.000 275.00 250.00 275.00 250.00 200.00 Rate reduced to Laffey (13-14); Fee reduced by 20% (Pre-11/6/14) Intraoffice communication with C. McAndrews regarding IEE 04/29/14 HBK and behavior incidents 0.125 430.00 430.00 53.75 53.75 43.00 Fee reduced 20% (Pre11/6/14) 0.125 05/01/14 DD Preparation of file materials for Evaluator review 05/06/14 DD Preparation of file materials and correspondence to Evaluators 1.000 0.500 1.125 0.500 1.000 275.00 145.00 145.00 250.00 116.00 116.00 309.38 72.50 145.00 281.25 58.00 116.00 N ot es ar d A w A dj us te d Fe eC re di te d ed Civil Action No. 15 851 (ESH) Fe eC la im ed H ou rs C re di te d R at eC la im ed R at eC re di te d H Review of correspondence from A. McLaughlin regarding observation Preparation of correspondence to A. McLaughlin regarding same Review of correspondence from D. Topolosky and Dr. Levisohn regarding IEE and rate Preparation of correspondence to D. Topolosky and Dr. Levisohn regarding same Preparation of correspondence to D. Topolosky regarding IEE Authorization Intraoffice communication with H.B. Konkler-Goldsmith regarding IEE and behavior incidents Review of correspondences from Dr. Levisohn regarding student information and rate Preparation of correspondence to 04/29/14 CEM Dr. Levisohn regarding same 1.125 Telephone communication with A. McLaughlin regarding 05/06/14 CEM observation Intraoffice communication with C. McAndrews regarding rate 05/07/14 HBK approval Page 30 of 104 ou rs C la im or m ed W or k Pe rf ls In iti a D at e Attachment to Mem. Op. [ECF No. 30] 225.00 Rate reduced to Laffey (13-14); Fee reduced by 20% (Pre-11/6/14) 46.40 Rate reduced to 75% USAO; Fee reduced by 20% (Pre-11/6/14) 92.80 Rate reduced to 75% USAO; Fee reduced by 20% (Pre-11/6/14) 0.125 0.125 275.00 250.00 34.38 31.25 25.00 Rate reduced to Laffey (13-14); Fee reduced by 20% (Pre-11/6/14) 0.125 0.125 430.00 430.00 53.75 53.75 43.00 Fee reduced 20% (Pre11/6/14) Preparation of correspondence to A. McLaughlin regarding 0.125 05/08/14 CEM observation 05/15/14 DD Telephone communication with client 0.125 0.125 Telephone communication with client regarding cause of action, 0.375 05/15/14 CEM evaluations and behavior Telephone communications with client regarding testing and 0.500 05/23/14 CEM transportation Telephone communications with client regarding transportation to 0.875 05/27/14 CEM IEE 0.625 0.125 0.125 0.125 0.375 0.500 0.875 275.00 275.00 275.00 145.00 275.00 275.00 275.00 250.00 250.00 250.00 116.00 250.00 250.00 250.00 171.88 34.38 34.38 18.13 103.13 137.50 240.63 156.25 31.25 31.25 14.50 93.75 125.00 218.75 N ot es ar d A w A dj us te d Fe eC re di te d ed Civil Action No. 15 851 (ESH) Fe eC la im ed H ou rs C re di te d R at eC la im ed R at eC re di te d H Telephone communication with A. McLaughlin regarding observation Intraoffice communication with H.B. Konkler-Goldsmith regarding rate approval Review of correspondence from D. Topolosky and L. Levisohn regarding IEE Preparation of correspondence to D. Topolosky and L. Levisohn regarding same Review of correspondence from A. McLaughlin regarding School 0.625 05/07/14 CEM District contact Intraoffice communication with H.B. Konkler-Goldsmith 05/12/14 CEM regarding IEE rate Page 31 of 104 ou rs C la im or m ed W or k Pe rf ls In iti a D at e Attachment to Mem. Op. [ECF No. 30] 125.00 Rate reduced to Laffey (13-14); Fee reduced by 20% (Pre-11/6/14) 25.00 Rate reduced to Laffey (13-14); Fee reduced by 20% (Pre-11/6/14) 25.00 Rate reduced to Laffey (13-14); Fee reduced by 20% (Pre-11/6/14) 11.60 Rate reduced to 75% USAO; Fee reduced by 20% (Pre-11/6/14) 75.00 Rate reduced to Laffey (13-14); Fee reduced by 20% (Pre-11/6/14) 100.00 Rate reduced to Laffey (13-14); Fee reduced by 20% (Pre-11/6/14) 175.00 Rate reduced to Laffey (13-14); Fee reduced by 20% (Pre-11/6/14) Telephone communication with 05/28/14 CEM client regarding IEE 0.125 0.125 275.00 250.00 34.38 31.25 25.00 Rate reduced to Laffey (13-14); Fee reduced by 20% (Pre-11/6/14) Review of file materials/Intraoffice communication regarding 05/29/14 HBK evaluation 0.125 0.125 430.00 430.00 53.75 53.75 43.00 Fee reduced 20% (Pre11/6/14) Review of file materials/Intraoffice communication regarding 05/29/14 DCM evaluation issues 0.125 0.125 450.00 450.00 56.25 56.25 45.00 Fee reduced 20% (Pre11/6/14) Research regarding transportation Preparation of correspondence to 0.750 05/30/14 CEM client regarding same Review of correspondence from client Investigate transportation Telephone communication with client Preparation of correspondence to client Telephone communication with 1.250 06/02/14 CEM UPS regarding lost package Preparation for, travel to and attendance at client meeting regarding transportation Telephone communications with A. McLaughlin regarding observation Preparation of correspondence to 06/03/14 CEM A. McLaughlin regarding same 1.375 Telephone communication with 06/10/14 CEM client regarding placement Intraoffice communication with C. McAndrews regarding 06/11/14 HBK placement Intraoffice communication with H.B. Konkler-Goldsmith 06/11/14 CEM regarding placement 0.125 06/17/14 FA 0.375 0.750 1.250 0.875 0.125 275.00 275.00 275.00 275.00 275.00 250.00 250.00 255.00 255.00 255.00 103.13 206.25 343.75 378.13 34.38 93.75 187.50 318.75 223.13 31.88 N ot es ar d A w A dj us te d Fe eC re di te d Fe eC la im ed Civil Action No. 15 851 (ESH) 75.00 Rate reduced to Laffey (13-14); Fee reduced by 20% (Pre-11/6/14) 150.00 Rate reduced to Laffey (13-14); Fee reduced by 20% (Pre-11/6/14) 255.00 Rate reduced to Laffey (14-15); Fee reduced by 20% (Pre-11/6/14) 178.50 Hours reduced (travel); Rate reduced to Laffey (14-15); Fee reduced 20% (Pre-11/6/14) 25.50 Rate reduced to Laffey (14-15); Fee reduced by 20% (Pre-11/6/14) 0.125 0.125 275.00 255.00 34.38 31.88 25.50 Rate reduced to Laffey (14-15); Fee reduced by 20% (Pre-11/6/14) 0.125 0.125 430.00 430.00 53.75 53.75 43.00 Fee reduced 20% (Pre11/6/14) 25.50 Rate reduced to Laffey (14-15); Fee reduced by 20% (Pre-11/6/14) 51.00 Rate reduced to Laffey (14-15); Fee reduced by 20% (Pre-11/6/14) 34.80 Rate reduced to 75% USAO; Fee reduced by 20% (Pre-11/6/14) 0.125 Review of correspondence from A. McLaughlin regarding observation Preparation of correspondence to 0.250 06/16/14 CEM A. McLaughlin Correspondence with client regarding Dr. Levisohn evaluation forms ed H ou rs C re di te d R at eC la im ed R at eC re di te d H Telephone communications with client regarding transportation Intraoffice communication with H.B. Konkler-Goldsmith and D.C. McAndrews regarding 0.375 05/29/14 CEM same Intraoffice communication with 06/09/14 CEM F. Abdul regarding IEE forms Page 32 of 104 ou rs C la im or m ed W or k Pe rf ls In iti a D at e Attachment to Mem. Op. [ECF No. 30] 0.375 0.125 0.250 0.375 275.00 275.00 145.00 255.00 255.00 116.00 34.38 68.75 54.38 31.88 63.75 43.50 Telephone communications with client regarding IEE 0.250 06/18/14 CEM transportation Arrange transportation Telephone communication with client Telephone communication with Taxi company regarding transportation Preparation of correspondence to 1.625 06/19/14 CEM client Intraoffice communication with H.B. Konkler-Goldsmith regarding IEE and observation Preparation of correspondence to A. McLaughlin regarding 0.250 06/25/14 CEM observation Review of correspondence from A. McLaughlin regarding observation Intraoffice communication with 07/01/14 CEM F. Abdul regarding observation 0.250 07/02/14 FA Intraoffice communication with F. Abdul regarding ESY 07/02/14 CEM schedule 07/03/14 FA Telephone communication with client 0.125 0.125 0.125 1.375 0.250 1.625 0.250 0.250 0.125 0.125 0.125 275.00 275.00 275.00 275.00 275.00 145.00 275.00 145.00 255.00 255.00 255.00 255.00 255.00 116.00 255.00 116.00 378.13 68.75 446.88 68.75 68.75 18.13 34.38 18.13 350.63 63.75 414.38 63.75 63.75 14.50 31.88 14.50 N ot es ar d A w A dj us te d Fe eC re di te d ed Civil Action No. 15 851 (ESH) Fe eC la im ed H ou rs C re di te d R at eC la im ed R at eC re di te d H Intraoffice communication with F. Abdul regarding UPS delivery Review of correspondences from client regarding ESY, observation and summer transportation Preparation of correspondences to client regarding same Review of correspondences from A. McLaughlin regarding observation Preparation of correspondences to A. McLaughlin regarding same Intraoffice communication with H.B. Konkler-Goldsmith 1.375 06/17/14 CEM regarding IEE Telephone communication with client Page 33 of 104 ou rs C la im or m ed W or k Pe rf ls In iti a D at e Attachment to Mem. Op. [ECF No. 30] 280.50 Rate reduced to Laffey (14-15); Fee reduced by 20% (Pre-11/6/14) 51.00 Rate reduced to Laffey (14-15); Fee reduced by 20% (Pre-11/6/14) 331.50 Rate reduced to Laffey (14-15); Fee reduced by 20% (Pre-11/6/14) 51.00 Rate reduced to Laffey (14-15); Fee reduced by 20% (Pre-11/6/14) 51.00 Rates reduced to Laffey (14-15); Fee reduced by 20% (Pre-11/6/14) 11.60 Rate reduced to 75% USAO; Fee reduced by 20% (Pre-11/6/14) 25.50 Rates reduced to Laffey (14-15); Fee reduced by 20% (Pre-11/6/14) 11.60 Rate reduced to 75% USAO; Fee reduced by 20% (Pre-11/6/14) 0.250 Review of correspondence from A. McLaughlin regarding ESY observation Telephone communication with client Preparation of correspondence to 0.375 07/09/14 CEM client Review of correspondence from client Preparation of correspondence to 0.375 07/10/14 CEM client Intraoffice communication with C. McAndrews regarding 0.125 07/11/14 HBK services Review of correspondence from client regarding ESY Preparation of correspondence to A. McLaughlin regarding ESY observation Intraoffice communication with H.B. Konkler-Goldsmith 0.500 07/11/14 CEM regarding services Review of correspondence from client regarding new contact 0.125 07/15/14 CEM information Review of correspondence from A. McLaughlin regarding observation Preparation of correspondence to 07/16/14 CEM A. McLaughlin regarding same 0.125 Intraoffice communication with 07/17/14 CEM F. Abdul regarding UPS 07/18/14 FA Preparation of file materials 0.125 0.125 Review of correspondence from client regarding new contact information Preparation of correspondence to 0.125 07/21/14 CEM client regarding same 0.250 0.250 0.375 275.00 275.00 275.00 255.00 255.00 255.00 68.75 68.75 103.13 63.75 63.75 95.63 N ot es ar d A w A dj us te d Fe eC re di te d ed Civil Action No. 15 851 (ESH) Fe eC la im ed H ou rs C re di te d R at eC la im ed R at eC re di te d H Intraoffice communication with F. Abdul regarding ESY observation Correspondence with A. McLaughlin regarding same Review of correspondence from A. McLaughlin regarding 0.250 07/03/14 CEM observation Telephone communication with client regarding placement and 07/08/14 CEM ESY Page 34 of 104 ou rs C la im or m ed W or k Pe rf ls In iti a D at e Attachment to Mem. Op. [ECF No. 30] 51.00 Rate reduced to Laffey (14-15); Fee reduced by 20% (Pre-11/6/14) 51.00 Rate reduced to Laffey (14-15); Fee reduced by 20% (Pre-11/6/14) 76.50 Rate reduced to Laffey (14-15); Fee reduced by 20% (Pre-11/6/14) 0.375 275.00 255.00 103.13 95.63 76.50 Rate reduced to Laffey (14-15); Fee reduced by 20% (Pre-11/6/14) 0.125 430.00 430.00 53.75 53.75 43.00 Fee reduced 20% (Pre11/6/14) 102.00 Rate reduced to Laffey (14-15); Fee reduced by 20% (Pre-11/6/14) 25.50 Rate reduced to Laffey (14-15); Fee reduced by 20% (Pre-11/6/14) 25.50 Rate reduced to Laffey (14-15); Fee reduced by 20% (Pre-11/6/14) 25.50 Rate reduced to Laffey (14-15); Fee reduced by 20% (Pre-11/6/14) 11.60 Rate reduced to 75% USAO; Fee reduced by 20% (Pre-11/6/14) 25.50 Rate reduced to Laffey (14-15); Fee reduced by 20% (Pre-11/6/14) 0.500 0.125 0.125 0.125 0.125 0.125 275.00 275.00 275.00 275.00 145.00 275.00 255.00 255.00 255.00 255.00 116.00 255.00 137.50 34.38 34.38 34.38 18.13 34.38 127.50 31.88 31.88 31.88 14.50 31.88 Intraoffice communication with 07/23/14 HBK C. McAndrews regarding IEEs Intraoffice communication with H.B. Konkler-Goldsmith 07/24/14 CEM regarding IEEs Telephone communication with 07/31/14 CEM client regarding placement Intraoffice communication with H.B. Konkler-Goldsmith 08/01/14 CEM regarding residency 0.125 0.250 0.125 Preparation of correspondence to 08/05/14 CEM L. Levisohn regarding evaluation 0.125 Review of correspondence from Dr. Levisohn regarding IEE Preparation of correspondence to Dr. Levisohn regarding same Preparation of correspondence to A. McLaughlin regarding observation Intraoffice communication with H.B. Konkler-Goldsmith 0.500 08/06/14 CEM regarding enrollment Review of correspondence from 08/07/14 CEM A. McLaughlin regarding IEE 0.125 0.125 0.125 0.250 0.125 0.125 0.500 0.125 430.00 275.00 275.00 275.00 275.00 275.00 275.00 430.00 255.00 255.00 255.00 255.00 255.00 255.00 53.75 34.38 68.75 34.38 34.38 137.50 34.38 31.88 63.75 31.88 31.88 127.50 31.88 N ot es ar d A w A dj us te d ed 53.75 Fe eC re di te d H 0.125 Civil Action No. 15 851 (ESH) Fe eC la im ed H ou rs C re di te d R at eC la im ed R at eC re di te d Page 35 of 104 ou rs C la im or m ed W or k Pe rf ls In iti a D at e Attachment to Mem. Op. [ECF No. 30] 43.00 Fee reduced 20% (Pre11/6/14) 25.50 Rates reduced to Laffey (14-15); Fee reduced by 20% (Pre-11/6/14) 51.00 Rate reduced to Laffey (14-15); Fee reduced by 20% (Pre-11/6/14) 25.50 Rate reduced to Laffey (14-15); Fee reduced by 20% (Pre-11/6/14) 25.50 Rate reduced to Laffey (14-15); Fee reduced by 20% (Pre-11/6/14) 102.00 Rate reduced to Laffey (14-15); Fee reduced by 20% (Pre-11/6/14) 25.50 Rate reduced to Laffey (14-15); Fee reduced by 20% (Pre-11/6/14) Preparation of correspondence to A. McLaughlin regarding IEE Intraoffice communication with H.B. Konkler-Goldsmith 0.250 08/08/14 CEM regarding enrollment 0.250 275.00 255.00 68.75 63.75 51.00 Rate reduced to Laffey (14-15); Fee reduced by 20% (Pre-11/6/14) Intraoffice communication with 08/26/14 HBK C. McAndrews regarding IEE 0.125 430.00 430.00 53.75 53.75 43.00 Fee reduced 20% (Pre11/6/14) 51.00 Rate reduced to Laffey (14-15); Fee reduced by 20% (Pre-11/6/14) Review of IEE Report Intraoffice communication with H.B. Konkler-Goldsmith 08/26/14 CEM regarding IEE 0.125 0.250 0.250 275.00 255.00 68.75 63.75 N ot es ar d A w A dj us te d ed Fe eC re di te d H Civil Action No. 15 851 (ESH) Fe eC la im ed H ou rs C re di te d R at eC la im ed R at eC re di te d Page 36 of 104 ou rs C la im or m ed W or k Pe rf ls In iti a D at e Attachment to Mem. Op. [ECF No. 30] Telephone communication with Dr. Levisohn regarding IEE Preparation of correspondences to client regarding enrollment and transportation Review of correspondence from client regarding same Review of correspondence from Dr. Levisohn regarding IEE Preparation of correspondence to Dr. Levisohn regarding same Preparation of correspondence to A. McLaughlin regarding 08/27/14 CEM observation 0.750 0.750 275.00 255.00 206.25 191.25 153.00 Rate reduced to Laffey (14-15); Fee reduced by 20% (Pre-11/6/14) Intraoffice communication with C. McAndrews regarding Due 08/28/14 HBK Process Complaint 0.125 430.00 430.00 53.75 53.75 43.00 Fee reduced 20% (Pre11/6/14) 382.50 Rate reduced to Laffey (14-15); Fee reduced by 20% (Pre-11/6/14) 102.00 Rate reduced to Laffey (14-15); Fee reduced by 20% (Pre-11/6/14) 76.50 Rate reduced to Laffey (14-15); Fee reduced by 20% (Pre-11/6/14) 178.50 Rate reduced to Laffey (14-15); Fee reduced by 20% (Pre-11/6/14) 0.125 Review of correspondence from A. McLaughlin regarding observation Review of correspondence from client Intraoffice communication with H.B. Konkler-Goldsmith regarding Due Process Complaint Telephone communication with client Preparation of correspondence to 08/28/14 CEM client 1.875 Review of correspondence from A. McLaughlin regarding observation Preparation of correspondence to A. McLaughlin regarding same Review of correspondence from 08/29/14 CEM client 0.500 Telephone communication with client regarding transportation Preparation of correspondence to 09/02/14 CEM client regarding same 0.375 Review of correspondence from A. McLaughlin regarding observation Telephone communication with A. McLaughlin regarding same Preparation of correspondence to A. McLaughlin regarding 09/04/14 CEM observation 0.875 1.875 0.500 0.375 0.875 275.00 275.00 275.00 275.00 255.00 255.00 255.00 255.00 515.63 137.50 103.13 240.63 478.13 127.50 95.63 223.13 09/09/14 FA Telephone communication with client regarding Releases 09/10/14 FA Telephone communication with client regarding Records Release Preparation of correspondence to client regarding same 0.375 Review of file materials/Intraoffice communication with F. Abdul 09/19/14 CEM regarding Releases 09/22/14 FA Preparation of file materials regarding Release 0.125 0.125 0.125 0.125 Telephone communication with 09/24/14 CEM client regarding 30 Day Review 0.125 Telephone communication with 09/24/14 CEM client regarding 30 Day Review 0.125 Telephone communication with DCPS Special Education Compliance Office regarding observation Preparation of correspondence to A. McLaughlin regarding 0.375 09/25/14 CEM observation 1.000 0.125 0.375 0.125 0.125 0.125 0.125 0.125 0.375 275.00 145.00 145.00 275.00 275.00 145.00 275.00 275.00 275.00 255.00 116.00 116.00 255.00 255.00 116.00 255.00 255.00 255.00 275.00 18.13 54.38 34.38 34.38 18.13 34.38 34.38 103.13 255.00 14.50 43.50 31.88 31.88 14.50 31.88 31.88 95.63 N ot es ar d A w A dj us te d Fe eC re di te d ed Civil Action No. 15 851 (ESH) Fe eC la im ed H ou rs C re di te d R at eC la im ed R at eC re di te d H Review of correspondences from A. McLaughlin regarding behavior and observation Research regarding observation policy Preparation of correspondence to A. McLaughlin regarding same Review of correspondences from client regarding IEP Meeting and transportation Preparation of correspondence to 1.000 09/08/14 CEM client regarding IEP Meeting Telephone communication with A. McLaughlin regarding 09/16/14 CEM observation Page 37 of 104 ou rs C la im or m ed W or k Pe rf ls In iti a D at e Attachment to Mem. Op. [ECF No. 30] 204.00 Rate reduced to Laffey (14-15); Fee reduced by 20% (Pre-11/6/14) 11.60 Rate reduced to 75% USAO; Fee reduced by 20% (Pre-11/6/14) 34.80 Rate reduced to 75% USAO; Fee reduced by 20% (Pre-11/6/14) 25.50 Rate reduced to Laffey (14-15); Fee reduced by 20% (Pre-11/6/14) 25.50 Rate reduced to Laffey (14-15); Fee reduced by 20% (Pre-11/6/14) 11.60 Rate reduced to 75% USAO; Fee reduced by 20% (Pre-11/6/14) 25.50 Rate reduced to Laffey (14-15); Fee reduced by 20% (Pre-11/6/14) 25.50 Rate reduced to Laffey (14-15); Fee reduced by 20% (Pre-11/6/14) 76.50 Rate reduced to Laffey (14-15); Fee reduced by 20% (Pre-11/6/14) Review of correspondence from client Telephone communication with client Review of correspondence from A. McLaughlin regarding observation Preparation of correspondence to A. McLaughlin regarding same Intraoffice communication with H.B. Konkler-Goldsmith 10/01/14 CEM regarding same 1.000 Review of correspondence from 10/07/14 CEM L. Levisohn regarding IEE 0.125 Intraoffice communication with H.B. Konkler-Goldsmith regarding Due Process Complaint Preparation of correspondence to 10/08/14 CEM L. Levisohn regarding IEE 0.250 Review of correspondence from 10/09/14 CEM L. Levisohn regarding IEE 0.125 Review of correspondence from L. Levisohn regarding IEE Intraoffice communication with 10/15/14 CEM F. Abdul regarding same 0.375 Intraoffice communication with 10/21/14 CEM E. Gilmore regarding IEE 10/27/14 FA Preparation of records 0.125 0.125 0.125 N ot es ar d A w A dj us te d Fe eC re di te d ed Civil Action No. 15 851 (ESH) Fe eC la im ed H ou rs C re di te d R at eC la im ed R at eC re di te d H Review of correspondence from A. McLaughlin regarding observation Preparation of correspondence to A. McLaughlin regarding same Intraoffice communication with H.B. Konkler-Goldsmith 09/28/14 CEM regarding observation 0.250 Intraoffice communication with C. McAndrews regarding 10/01/14 HBK observation 0.125 Intraoffice communication with 10/17/14 CEM F. Abdul regarding IEE Page 38 of 104 ou rs C la im or m ed W or k Pe rf ls In iti a D at e Attachment to Mem. Op. [ECF No. 30] 0.250 275.00 255.00 68.75 63.75 51.00 Rate reduced to Laffey (14-15); Fee reduced by 20% (Pre-11/6/14) 0.125 430.00 430.00 53.75 53.75 43.00 Fee reduced 20% (Pre11/6/14) 204.00 Rate reduced to Laffey (14-15); Fee reduced by 20% (Pre-11/6/14) 25.50 Rate reduced to Laffey (14-15); Fee reduced by 20% (Pre-11/6/14) 51.00 Rate reduced to Laffey (14-15); Fee reduced by 20% (Pre-11/6/14) 25.50 Rate reduced to Laffey (14-15); Fee reduced by 20% (Pre-11/6/14) 76.50 Rate reduced to Laffey (14-15); Fee reduced by 20% (Pre-11/6/14) 25.50 Rate reduced to Laffey (14-15); Fee reduced by 20% (Pre-11/6/14) 25.50 Rate reduced to Laffey (14-15); Fee reduced by 20% (Pre-11/6/14) 11.60 Rate reduced to 75% USAO; Fee reduced by 20% (Pre-11/6/14) 1.000 0.125 0.250 0.125 0.375 0.125 0.125 0.125 275.00 275.00 275.00 275.00 275.00 275.00 275.00 145.00 255.00 255.00 255.00 255.00 255.00 255.00 255.00 116.00 275.00 34.38 68.75 34.38 103.13 34.38 34.38 18.13 255.00 31.88 63.75 31.88 95.63 31.88 31.88 14.50 0.375 275.00 255.00 103.13 N ot es ar d A w A dj us te d ed 95.63 Fe eC re di te d H Review of correspondences from D. Topolosky regarding IEE Intraoffice communication with F. Abdul regarding same Preparation of correspondence to 0.375 10/27/14 CEM D. Topolosky regarding IEE Civil Action No. 15 851 (ESH) Fe eC la im ed H ou rs C re di te d R at eC la im ed R at eC re di te d Page 39 of 104 ou rs C la im or m ed W or k Pe rf ls In iti a D at e Attachment to Mem. Op. [ECF No. 30] 76.50 Rate reduced to Laffey (14-15); Fee reduced by 20% (Pre-11/6/14) 0.125 0.125 275.00 255.00 34.38 31.88 25.50 Rate reduced to Laffey (14-15); Fee reduced by 20% (Pre-11/6/14) 0.125 0.125 185.00 131.00 23.13 16.38 16.38 Rate reduced to 85% USAO 0.125 0.125 275.00 255.00 34.38 31.88 31.88 Rate reduced to Laffey (14-15) 3.125 3.125 275.00 255.00 859.38 796.88 796.88 Rate reduced to Laffey (14-15) 2.625 2.625 275.00 255.00 721.88 669.38 669.38 Rate reduced to Laffey (14-15) Preparation of Due Process Complaint Intraoffice communication with H.B. Konkler-Goldsmith regarding same Review of correspondence from client regarding IEP Preparation of correspondence to 0.875 11/18/14 CEM client regarding same 0.875 275.00 255.00 240.63 223.13 223.13 Rate reduced to Laffey (14-15) Preparation of correspondence to 11/24/14 CEM client regarding IEP 0.125 0.125 275.00 255.00 34.38 31.88 31.88 Rate reduced to Laffey (14-15) 0.125 275.00 255.00 34.38 31.88 31.88 0.125 275.00 255.00 34.38 31.88 31.88 0.500 0.500 275.00 255.00 137.50 127.50 127.50 0.625 0.625 275.00 255.00 171.88 159.38 159.38 Telephone communication with 11/03/14 CEM client Intraoffice communication with C. McAndrews regarding IEE Intraoffice communication with M. Clarke regarding 11/06/14 CEM communication with client Review of file materials regarding Due Process 11/14/14 CEM Complaint 11/06/14 MC Telephone communication with client Preparation of Due Process Complaint Intraoffice communication with H.B. Konkler-Goldsmith regarding Due Process 11/17/14 CEM Complaint Review of correspondence from client regarding conference call Preparation of correspondence to 0.125 11/25/14 CEM client regarding same Review of correspondence from 11/25/14 CEM counsel 0.125 Telephone communication with client regarding IEP Intraoffice communication with H.B. Konkler-Goldsmith 11/26/14 CEM regarding McKinney-Vento Research regarding Mckinney12/03/14 CEM Vento Act Rate reduced to Laffey (14-15) Rate reduced to Laffey (14-15) Rate reduced to Laffey (14-15) Rate reduced to Laffey (14-15) N ot es ar d A w A dj us te d ed Fe eC re di te d H Civil Action No. 15 851 (ESH) Fe eC la im ed H ou rs C re di te d R at eC la im ed R at eC re di te d Page 40 of 104 ou rs C la im or m ed W or k Pe rf ls In iti a D at e Attachment to Mem. Op. [ECF No. 30] Preparation of Due Process 12/04/14 CEM Complaint Review and revise Due Process 12/05/14 JTN Complaint 0.375 0.375 275.00 255.00 103.13 95.63 95.63 Rate reduced to Laffey (14-15) 0.375 0.375 240.00 240.00 90.00 90.00 90.00 - Intraoffice communication with H.B. Konkler-Goldsmith regarding Due Process Complaint 0.125 0.125 230.00 230.00 28.75 28.75 28.75 - Intraoffice communication with C. McAndrews regarding Due 12/11/14 HBK Process Complaint 0.125 0.125 430.00 430.00 53.75 53.75 53.75 - 0.125 0.125 275.00 255.00 34.38 31.88 31.88 1.000 1.000 185.00 131.00 185.00 131.00 131.00 1.375 1.375 275.00 255.00 378.13 350.63 350.63 Rate reduced to Laffey (14-15) Rate reduced to 85% USAO Rate reduced to Laffey (14-15) 0.250 0.250 275.00 255.00 68.75 63.75 63.75 Rate reduced to Laffey (14-15) 12/11/14 JCL Intraoffice communication with H.B. Konkler-Goldsmith regarding Due Process 12/11/14 CEM Complaint Preparation of Due Process 12/16/14 MC Complaint for filing Preparation of Due Process 12/16/14 CEM Complaint Review of file materials regarding Hearing Officer 12/18/14 CEM assignment Review of correspondence from Hearing Officer Blount and counsel regarding Prehearing Conference and Due Process Hearing Preparation of correspondence to Hearing Officer and counsel regarding same Telephone communication with E. Castillo regarding RSM Review of correspondence from 0.375 12/19/14 CEM E. Castillo regarding RSM 0.500 275.00 255.00 103.13 127.50 127.50 Hours reduced (RSM); Rate reduced to Laffey (14-15) Review of initial Order and Notice of Prehearing Conference Intraoffice communication with H.B. Konkler-Goldsmith and D.C. McAndrews regarding 0.375 12/22/14 CEM scheduling 0.375 275.00 255.00 103.13 95.63 95.63 Rate reduced to Laffey (14-15) Review of correspondence from E. Castillo regarding RSM Preparation of correspondence to E. Castillo regarding same Intraoffice communication with D.C. McAndrews and H.B. Konkler-Goldsmith regarding 0.250 12/31/14 CEM regarding same 0.000 275.00 255.00 68.75 0.00 0.00 Hours reduced (RSM); Rate reduced to Laffey (14-15) 01/02/15 DCM Preparation for Due Process 0.375 450.00 450.00 168.75 168.75 168.75 - 0.375 N ot es ar d A w A dj us te d ed Fe eC re di te d H Intraoffice communication with D.C. McAndrews regarding scheduling Telephone communication with client Review of correspondence from Hearing Officer Blount regarding scheduling Preparation of correspondence to Hearing Officer Blount regarding same Review of correspondence from E. Castillo regarding same Review of DCPS Response Review of correspondence from Hearing Officer regarding Due 1.125 01/02/15 CEM Process Hearing Review of file materials 01/05/15 JH regarding Due Process 0.125 Telephone communication with 01/05/15 MC client 0.125 Civil Action No. 15 851 (ESH) Fe eC la im ed H ou rs C re di te d R at eC la im ed R at eC re di te d Page 41 of 104 ou rs C la im or m ed W or k Pe rf ls In iti a D at e Attachment to Mem. Op. [ECF No. 30] 1.125 275.00 255.00 309.38 286.88 286.88 0.125 185.00 131.00 23.13 16.38 16.38 0.125 185.00 131.00 23.13 16.38 16.38 Rate reduced to Laffey (14-15) Rate reduced to 85% USAO Rate reduced to 85% USAO Intraoffice communication with D.C. McAndrews, J. Hardy 01/05/15 CEM regarding Prehearing Conference 0.125 0.125 275.00 255.00 34.38 31.88 31.88 Rate reduced to Laffey (14-15) Review of correspondences from Hearing Officer and Notices Review of correspondence from counsel, M. Washington Preparation for Due Process 0.625 01/06/15 DCM Review of records 0.625 450.00 450.00 281.25 281.25 281.25 - 0.250 185.00 131.00 46.25 32.75 32.75 Rate reduced to 85% USAO 01/06/15 JH Review of file materials/Intraoffice communication regarding file contents 0.250 N ot es ar d A w A dj us te d ed Fe eC re di te d H Civil Action No. 15 851 (ESH) Fe eC la im ed H ou rs C re di te d R at eC la im ed R at eC re di te d Page 42 of 104 ou rs C la im or m ed W or k Pe rf ls In iti a D at e Attachment to Mem. Op. [ECF No. 30] Review of Prehearing Conference Order Telephone communication with client Intraoffice communication with J. Hardy regarding file Intraoffice communication with M. Clarke regarding file Intraoffice communication with J. Hardy regarding records Review of correspondence from E. Castillo regarding RSM Preparation of correspondence to E. Castillo regarding same Review of correspondence from counsel, M. Washington, Hearing Officer Blount and D.C. McAndrews regarding Prehearing Conference and Due Process Hearing Intraoffice communication with D.C. McAndrews regarding residence Preparation of correspondence to 1.250 01/06/15 CEM client 1.125 275.00 255.00 343.75 286.88 286.88 Hours reduced (RSM); Rate reduced to Laffey (14-15) Intraoffice communication with C. McAndrews regarding 01/07/15 HBK Resolution Meeting 0.125 0.000 430.00 430.00 53.75 0.00 0.00 Hours reduced (RSM) Preparation of correspondence to E. Castillo regarding RSM Review of correspondence from E. Castillo regarding same Preparation of correspondence to client Preparation for, travel to and attendance at RSM Intraoffice communication with H.B. Konkler-Goldsmith regarding RSM Research regarding 5.625 01/07/15 CEM transportation 0.000 275.00 255.00 1,546.88 0.00 0.00 - 01/08/15 DCM Preparation for Due Process 0.250 450.00 450.00 112.50 112.50 112.50 - 0.250 01/13/15 JH Review of file materials regarding school record and Resolution Disposition form N ot es ar d A w A dj us te d Fe eC re di te d ed Civil Action No. 15 851 (ESH) Fe eC la im ed H ou rs C re di te d R at eC la im ed R at eC re di te d H Review of correspondences from colleague regarding resources Preparation of correspondences to colleague regarding same Preparation of correspondence to D. Hodges regarding residence Intraoffice communication with D.C. McAndrews regarding Due Process Hearing Preparation of correspondence to 1.000 01/08/15 CEM L. Levisohn regarding same Review of records 01/12/15 DCM Preparation for Due Process Preparation for Prehearing Conference and Due Process 01/12/15 CEM Hearing Telephone communication with 01/13/15 MC client Page 43 of 104 ou rs C la im or m ed W or k Pe rf ls In iti a D at e Attachment to Mem. Op. [ECF No. 30] 1.000 275.00 255.00 275.00 255.00 255.00 Rate reduced to Laffey (14-15) 1.750 1.750 450.00 450.00 787.50 787.50 787.50 - 1.000 1.000 275.00 255.00 275.00 255.00 255.00 0.125 0.125 185.00 131.00 23.13 16.38 16.38 Rate reduced to Laffey (14-15) Rate reduced to 85% USAO 0.125 0.000 185.00 131.00 23.13 0.00 0.00 Hours reduced (RSM) N ot es ar d A w A dj us te d Fe eC re di te d ed Civil Action No. 15 851 (ESH) Fe eC la im ou rs C la im ed H ou rs C re di te d R at eC la im ed R at eC re di te d Page 44 of 104 H or m ed W or k Pe rf ls In iti a D at e Attachment to Mem. Op. [ECF No. 30] Research regarding housing Review of correspondence from D. Hodges regarding client communication Preparation of correspondence to D. Hodges regarding same Review of correspondence from A. Anokye regarding RSM Intraoffice communication with D.C. McAndrews regarding same Telephone communication with client Preparation of correspondence to A. McLaughlin regarding Due Process Hearing Telephone communication with Lindamood Bell regarding evaluation Review of correspondence from Hearing Officer and counsel regarding Prehearing Conference Review of correspondence from A. McLaughlin regarding Due Process Hearing Review of correspondence from L. Levisohn regarding Due 1.625 01/13/15 CEM Process Hearing 1.500 275.00 255.00 446.88 382.50 382.50 Hours reduced (RSM); Rate reduced to Laffey (14-15) Review of multiple emails from prospective witnesses Preparation of multiple emails to prospective witnesses Preparation for and attendance at Prehearing Conference Preparation of correspondence to Dr. Levisohn Preparation of Motion for Continuance Preparation of Witness Lists Preparation of questions for Due 2.500 01/14/15 DCM Process 2.500 450.00 450.00 1,125.00 1,125.00 1,125.00 - N ot es ar d A w A dj us te d ed Fe eC re di te d H Civil Action No. 15 851 (ESH) Fe eC la im ed H ou rs C re di te d R at eC la im ed R at eC re di te d Page 45 of 104 ou rs C la im or m ed W or k Pe rf ls In iti a D at e Attachment to Mem. Op. [ECF No. 30] Intraoffice communications with M. Clarke regarding compensatory education Intraoffice communication with D.C. McAndrews regarding Due Process Hearing Review of correspondence from Dr. Levisohn regarding same Telephone communication with Lindamood Bell regarding evaluation Review of correspondence from counsel M. Washington, regarding RSM disposition Preparation of Motion Review of Prehearing Conference Order Preparation of memorandum to 1.875 01/14/15 CEM file regarding same 1.500 275.00 255.00 515.63 382.50 382.50 Hours reduced (RSM); Rate reduced to Laffey (14-15) Preparation of Motion for Continuance Review of correspondence from Dr. Levisohn Preparation of correspondence to 0.375 01/15/15 DCM Dr. Levisohn 0.375 450.00 450.00 168.75 168.75 168.75 - 0.250 0.250 185.00 131.00 46.25 32.75 32.75 Rate reduced to 85% USAO Intraoffice communication with D.C. McAndrews regarding Motions Preparation of correspondence to Hearing Officer regarding Motion for Continuance Review of correspondence from Hearing Officer regarding same Intraoffice communication with 01/15/15 CEM M. Clarke regarding evaluation 0.750 0.750 275.00 255.00 206.25 191.25 191.25 Rate reduced to Laffey (14-15) Preparation of correspondence to School District regarding IEP Review of correspondence from counsel regarding transportation Preparation of correspondence to 0.500 01/16/15 DCM counsel regarding same 0.500 450.00 450.00 225.00 225.00 225.00 - 01/15/15 MC Intraoffice communication with C. McAndrews regarding Lindamood Bell testing Telephone communication with client N ot es ar d A w A dj us te d Fe eC re di te d ed Civil Action No. 15 851 (ESH) Fe eC la im ou rs C la im ed H ou rs C re di te d R at eC la im ed R at eC re di te d Page 46 of 104 H or m ed W or k Pe rf ls In iti a D at e Attachment to Mem. Op. [ECF No. 30] Review of correspondence from K. Conaboy regarding Due Process Hearing Preparation of correspondence to K. Conaboy regarding same Telephone communications with client regarding transportation and evaluation Intraoffice communications with D.C. McAndrews regarding Due Process Hearing and behavior Telephone communication with counsel, M. Washington, regarding transportation Preparation of correspondences to counsel regarding same Telephone communication with Lindamood Bell regarding evaluation Preparation of correspondence to C. Sandoval regarding IEP Review of correspondence from 01/16/15 CEM counsel regarding transportation 2.375 2.375 275.00 255.00 653.13 605.63 605.63 Rate reduced to Laffey (14-15) Review of file materials/Intraoffice communication regarding Lindamood Bell Telephone communications with client regarding transportation and housing Preparation of Motion to Correct 1.250 01/19/15 CEM Prehearing Conference Order 1.250 275.00 255.00 343.75 318.75 318.75 Rate reduced to Laffey (14-15) Review of Hearing Officer's Order Preparation of Motion to Correct Order Review of correspondence from counsel, M. Washington Preparation of correspondence to 0.375 01/20/15 DCM counsel 0.375 450.00 450.00 168.75 168.75 168.75 - N ot es ar d A w A dj us te d Fe eC re di te d ed Civil Action No. 15 851 (ESH) Fe eC la im ou rs C la im ed H ou rs C re di te d R at eC la im ed R at eC re di te d Page 47 of 104 H or m ed W or k Pe rf ls In iti a D at e Attachment to Mem. Op. [ECF No. 30] Preparation of correspondence to A. McLaughlin regarding resume Review of correspondences from A. McLaughlin regarding same and Due Process Hearing Review of correspondences from counsel, M. Washington, regarding continuance and Prehearing Conference Order Telephone communication with client regarding transportation Review of correspondence from Hearing Officer regarding Due Process Hearing Intraoffice communication with D.C. McAndrews regarding 1.125 01/20/15 CEM same 1.125 275.00 255.00 309.38 286.88 286.88 Rate reduced to Laffey (14-15) Telephone communications with counsel, M. Washington and C. 0.250 01/21/15 DCM McAndrews 0.250 450.00 450.00 112.50 112.50 112.50 - 0.250 275.00 255.00 68.75 63.75 63.75 Rate reduced to Laffey (14-15) 0.125 450.00 450.00 56.25 56.25 56.25 - Preparation of correspondence to Hearing Officer regarding Due Process Hearing 0.250 01/21/15 CEM Review of file materials Review of correspondence from 0.125 01/22/15 DCM Hearing Officer Telephone communications with client regarding transportation and reading Intraoffice communication with H.B. Konkler-Goldsmith regarding residence Intraoffice communications with D.C. McAndrews regarding resumes and transportation Review of correspondences from counsel, M. Washington, regarding transportation and records Preparation of correspondences to counsel regarding same Review of correspondence from Lindamood Bell regarding evaluation Review of correspondence from Hearing Officer regarding Due Process Hearing Research regarding transportation Preparation of correspondence to D. Douglas regarding Due Process Review of correspondence from A. McLaughlin regarding same Preparation of correspondence to A. McLaughlin regarding Due Process Hearing Preparation of correspondence to Dr. Levisohn regarding same Preparation of correspondence to client regarding reading evaluation Preparation of Intake for 2.750 01/22/15 CEM Reading Evaluation Review of correspondence from Hearing Officer regarding Motion Preparation of correspondence to Hearing Officer regarding same and scheduling Preparation of correspondence to K. Conaboy and D. Douglas regarding Due Process Hearing Review of correspondence from 0.625 01/23/15 CEM D. Douglas regarding same Intraoffice communication with D.C. McAndrews regarding 0.125 01/26/15 CEM witnesses Review of records 0.750 01/27/15 DCM Preparation for hearing N ot es ar d A w A dj us te d Fe eC re di te d ed Civil Action No. 15 851 (ESH) Fe eC la im ou rs C la im ed H ou rs C re di te d R at eC la im ed R at eC re di te d Page 48 of 104 H or m ed W or k Pe rf ls In iti a D at e Attachment to Mem. Op. [ECF No. 30] 2.500 275.00 255.00 756.25 637.50 637.50 Hours reduced (travel); Rate reduced to Laffey (13-14); Fee reduced 20% (Pre-11/6/14) 0.625 275.00 255.00 171.88 159.38 159.38 Rate reduced to Laffey (14-15) 0.125 275.00 255.00 34.38 31.88 31.88 Rate reduced to Laffey (14-15) 0.750 450.00 450.00 337.50 337.50 337.50 - 01/27/15 AS Intraoffice communication with C. McAndrews regarding Due Process Hearing Telephone communication with client regarding same N ot es ar d A w A dj us te d ed Fe eC re di te d H 0.250 Civil Action No. 15 851 (ESH) Fe eC la im ed H ou rs C re di te d R at eC la im ed R at eC re di te d Page 49 of 104 ou rs C la im or m ed W or k Pe rf ls In iti a D at e Attachment to Mem. Op. [ECF No. 30] 0.250 155.00 116.00 38.75 29.00 29.00 Rate reduced to 75% USAO Review of Order granting continuance Review of Prehearing Conference Order Preparation of correspondence to A. McLaughlin regarding Due Process Hearing Intraoffice communication with D.C. McAndrews regarding witnesses Preparation of memorandum to D.C. McAndrews and J. Hardy regarding same Review of correspondence from Dr. Levisohn regarding Due Process Hearing Preparation of correspondence to Dr. Levisohn regarding same Preparation of correspondence to D. Douglas regarding Due Process Hearing Intraoffice communication with 01/27/15 CEM A. Sauer regarding same 2.000 Intraoffice communication regarding Due Process Hearing 01/28/15 HBK and residence 0.125 2.000 275.00 255.00 550.00 510.00 510.00 Rate reduced to Laffey (14-15) 0.125 430.00 430.00 53.75 53.75 53.75 - Intraoffice communications with H.B. Konkler-Goldsmith, D.C. McAndrews and C. McAndrews regarding Due Process Hearing and residence 0.250 0.250 155.00 116.00 38.75 29.00 29.00 Rate reduced to 75% USAO Intraoffice communication a A. Sauer regarding Due Process Hearing Review of correspondence from A. McLaughlin regarding testimony Intraoffice communication with H.B. Konkler-Goldsmith, D.C. McAndrews and A. Sauer regarding Due Process Hearing 01/28/15 CEM and residence 0.375 0.375 275.00 255.00 103.13 95.63 95.63 Rate reduced to Laffey (14-15) 01/28/15 AS N ot es ar d A w A dj us te d ed Fe eC re di te d H Civil Action No. 15 851 (ESH) Fe eC la im ed H ou rs C re di te d R at eC la im ed R at eC re di te d Page 50 of 104 ou rs C la im or m ed W or k Pe rf ls In iti a D at e Attachment to Mem. Op. [ECF No. 30] Telephone communications with client regarding placement Telephone communication with Fairfax County Coordinated Services Planning regarding enrollment 0.625 0.625 155.00 116.00 96.88 72.50 72.50 Rate reduced to 75% USAO Telephone communications with client regarding contact information and placement Telephone communication with Fairfax County Coordinated Services Planning regarding enrollment Intraoffice communication with A. Sauer regarding same Telephone communication with D. Hodges regarding supports Review of correspondence from Hearing Officer regarding Motions Review of correspondence from 1.250 01/29/15 CEM client regarding transportation 1.250 275.00 255.00 343.75 318.75 318.75 Rate reduced to Laffey (14-15) 0.375 0.375 275.00 255.00 103.13 95.63 95.63 0.125 0.125 155.00 116.00 19.38 14.50 14.50 0.250 0.250 275.00 255.00 68.75 63.75 63.75 0.125 0.125 155.00 116.00 19.38 14.50 14.50 0.125 0.125 275.00 255.00 34.38 31.88 31.88 Rate reduced to Laffey (14-15) Rate reduced to 75% USAO Rate reduced to Laffey (14-15) 0.125 0.125 155.00 116.00 19.38 14.50 14.50 Rate reduced to 75% USAO 01/29/15 AS Telephone communication with client Intraoffice communication with A. Sauer regarding client 02/03/15 CEM communication Telephone communication with 02/04/15 AS client Telephone communication with client Intraoffice communication with A. Sauer regarding communication with client, 02/04/15 CEM transportation Telephone communication with 02/05/15 AS client Review of phone message 02/05/15 CEM regarding transportation 02/06/15 AS Telephone communication with client regarding transportation Rate reduced to Laffey (14-15) Rate reduced to 75% USAO 02/06/15 JH 02/07/15 DCM Review of records 0.130 275.00 255.00 206.25 N ot es ar d A w A dj us te d ed 33.15 Fe eC re di te d H Civil Action No. 15 851 (ESH) Fe eC la im ed H ou rs C re di te d R at eC la im ed R at eC re di te d Pe k W or Intraoffice communications with A. Sauer regarding transportation Review of correspondence from A. Anokye regarding IEP Meeting Intraoffice communications with D.C. McAndrews regarding same and conference call Review of correspondence from 02/06/15 CEM client regarding IEP Meeting 0.750 Review of file materials regarding Invitation to IEP and Resolution Meeting Page 51 of 104 ou rs C la im or m ed rf ls In iti a D at e Attachment to Mem. Op. [ECF No. 30] 33.15 Hours reduced (IEP); Rate reduced to Laffey (14-15) 0.125 0.000 185.00 131.00 23.13 0.00 0.00 Hours reduced (RSM); Rate reduced to 85% USAO 0.750 0.750 450.00 450.00 337.50 337.50 337.50 - Hours reduced (IEP); Rate reduced to Laffey (14-15) Intraoffice communication with D.C. McAndrews regarding records and meeting Intraoffice communication with A. Sauer regarding IEP meeting Research regarding IEPs Intraoffice communication with D.C. McAndrews regarding IEP Preparation of correspondence to 1.250 02/07/15 CEM counsel Intraoffice communication with D.C. McAndrews regarding 0.125 02/08/15 CEM records Telephone communication with 02/09/15 AS client 0.250 0.000 275.00 255.00 343.75 0.00 0.00 0.125 275.00 255.00 34.38 31.88 31.88 0.250 155.00 116.00 38.75 29.00 29.00 Rate reduced to Laffey (14-15) Rate reduced to 75% USAO Intraoffice communication with D.C. McAndrews regarding IEP Meeting and residence Intraoffice communication with A. Sauer regarding IEP Meeting Review of correspondence from client Review of correspondence from counsel Preparation of correspondence to 1.500 02/09/15 CEM counsel 0.000 275.00 255.00 412.50 0.00 0.00 Hours reduced (IEP); Rate reduced to Laffey (14-15) Preparation for resolution session Telephone communication with client Review of records Review of correspondence from 0.750 02/09/15 DCM counsel, M. Washington 0.000 450.00 450.00 337.50 0.00 0.00 Hours reduced (RSM) N ot es ar d A w A dj us te d ed Fe eC re di te d H 0.125 Civil Action No. 15 851 (ESH) Fe eC la im Pe k W or Intraoffice communication with C. McAndrews regarding 02/10/15 HBK procedure ed H ou rs C re di te d R at eC la im ed R at eC re di te d ou rs C la im or m ed Page 52 of 104 rf ls In iti a D at e Attachment to Mem. Op. [ECF No. 30] 0.125 430.00 430.00 53.75 53.75 53.75 - 0.750 450.00 450.00 337.50 337.50 337.50 0.125 155.00 116.00 19.38 14.50 14.50 0.125 185.00 131.00 23.13 16.38 16.38 Rate reduced to 75% USAO Rate reduced to 85% USAO Review of correspondence from counsel, M. Washington, regarding records Intraoffice communications with D.C. McAndrews regarding same Telephone communication with client regarding meetings Intraoffice communication with H.B. Konkler-Goldsmith 0.625 02/10/15 CEM regarding procedure 0.625 275.00 255.00 171.88 159.38 159.38 Rate reduced to Laffey (14-15) Review of correspondence from counsel, M. Washington Preparation of correspondence to counsel 0.250 02/11/15 DCM Correspondence with client 0.250 450.00 450.00 112.50 112.50 112.50 - Review of correspondences from counsel, M. Washington Review of correspondence from client Preparation of correspondence to client Preparation of correspondence to 0.750 02/10/15 DCM counsel Telephone communication with client regarding status 0.125 02/10/15 AS Review of file materials 02/10/15 JH regarding Custody Order 0.125 Review of correspondence from counsel, M. Washington, regarding records Intraoffice communication with D.C. McAndrews regarding same, IEP and Resolution 0.375 02/11/15 CEM Meeting 0.125 275.00 255.00 103.13 31.88 31.88 Hours reduced (RSM); Rate reduced to Laffey (14-15) Preparation for, travel to and attendance at Resolution Meeting 02/12/15 DCM Review of records 0.000 450.00 450.00 4,500.00 0.00 0.00 Hours reduced (RSM) Correspondence with client Review of records Preparation of witness sheets for 0.375 02/13/15 DCM deposition 10.000 0.375 450.00 450.00 168.75 168.75 168.75 - Intraoffice communication with D.C. McAndrews regarding 02/13/15 CEM Resolution Meeting 0.000 275.00 255.00 34.38 0.00 0.00 - 0.125 Intraoffice communication with D.C. McAndrews regarding reading, IEP Meeting and Due 02/14/15 CEM Process Hearing N ot es ar d A w A dj us te d ed Fe eC re di te d H Civil Action No. 15 851 (ESH) Fe eC la im ed H ou rs C re di te d R at eC la im ed R at eC re di te d Page 53 of 104 ou rs C la im or m ed W or k Pe rf ls In iti a D at e Attachment to Mem. Op. [ECF No. 30] 1.250 0.500 275.00 255.00 343.75 127.50 127.50 Hours reduced (IEP); Rate reduced to Laffey (14-15) Review of correspondence from colleague regarding homeless services Intraoffice communication with D.C. McAndrews regarding 0.125 02/16/15 CEM same 0.000 275.00 255.00 34.38 0.00 0.00 Hours reduced (noncompensable) Telephone communication with client Telephone communication with 02/18/15 DCM N. Gregerson 0.375 0.375 450.00 450.00 168.75 168.75 168.75 - Intraoffice communication with A. Sauer regarding OSSE contacts Intraoffice communication with D.C. McAndrews regarding reading intervention Review of correspondence from colleague regarding McKinneyVento Preparation of correspondence to 0.375 02/18/15 CEM colleague regarding same 0.375 275.00 255.00 103.13 95.63 95.63 Rate reduced to Laffey (14-15) Preparation of correspondence to L. Levisohn Preparation of correspondence to A. McLaughlin Telephone communications with client Preparation of correspondence to counsel, M. Washington Review of correspondence from counsel Telephone communication with 2.250 02/19/15 DCM N. Gregorson 2.250 450.00 450.00 1,012.50 1,012.50 1,012.50 - Intraoffice communication with H.B. Konkler-Goldsmith Intraoffice communication with D.C. McAndrews regarding Due 0.375 02/19/15 CEM Process Hearing 0.375 275.00 255.00 103.13 95.63 95.63 Rate reduced to Laffey (14-15) Review of correspondence from N. Gregerson Preparation of correspondence to N. Gregerson Review of correspondence from L. Levisohn Preparation of correspondence to 0.375 02/20/15 DCM L. Levisohn 0.375 450.00 450.00 168.75 168.75 168.75 - Review of emails N ot es ar d A w A dj us te d ed Fe eC re di te d H 0.125 Civil Action No. 15 851 (ESH) Fe eC la im ed H ou rs C re di te d R at eC la im ed R at eC re di te d Pe k W or 02/20/15 JH Page 54 of 104 ou rs C la im or m ed rf ls In iti a D at e Attachment to Mem. Op. [ECF No. 30] 0.125 185.00 131.00 23.13 16.38 16.38 Rate reduced to 85% USAO Review of correspondence from N. Gregorson regarding Due Process Hearing Review of correspondence from A. McLaughlin regarding same Intraoffice communication with D.C. McAndrews and J. Hardy regarding OSSE 02/20/15 CEM Review of DCPS report on IEE 0.875 Preparation for Due Process 02/21/15 DCM Hearing 0.375 0.875 275.00 255.00 240.63 223.13 223.13 Rate reduced to Laffey (14-15) 0.375 450.00 450.00 168.75 168.75 168.75 - Preparation for Due Process Review of records Preparation of Exhibits Preparation of witness sheets Preparation of correspondence to 8.250 02/22/15 DCM Experts 8.250 450.00 450.00 3,712.50 3,712.50 3,712.50 - Intraoffice communication with D.C. McAndrews regarding Due 0.625 02/22/15 CEM Process Hearing 0.625 275.00 255.00 171.88 159.38 159.38 Rate reduced to Laffey (14-15) Telephone communication with Dr. L. Levisohn 02/23/15 DCM Preparation of witness sheets 1.375 450.00 450.00 618.75 618.75 618.75 - 1.375 Telephone communication with L. Levisohn regarding Due Process Hearing Preparation of correspondence to A. Sauer regarding Due Process Hearing Review of correspondence from C. Sandoval regarding IEP Intraoffice communication with D.C. McAndrews regarding 1.125 02/23/15 CEM same 0.875 275.00 255.00 309.38 223.13 223.13 Hours reduced (IEP); Rate reduced to Laffey (14-15) Five-Day Notice Correspondence with D. Douglas Correspondence with M. Washington Review of correspondence from Dr. A. McLaughlin Preparation of correspondence to Dr. A. McLaughlin Telephone communication with Dr. N. Gregerson regarding 3.125 02/24/15 DCM possible testimony 3.125 450.00 450.00 1,406.25 1,406.25 1,406.25 - Telephone communication with client Hearing travel arrangements Research regarding same N ot es ar d A w A dj us te d ed Fe eC re di te d H Civil Action No. 15 851 (ESH) Fe eC la im ed H ou rs C re di te d R at eC la im ed R at eC re di te d Page 55 of 104 ou rs C la im or m ed W or k Pe rf ls In iti a D at e Attachment to Mem. Op. [ECF No. 30] 1.125 1.125 155.00 116.00 174.38 130.50 130.50 Rate reduced to 75% USAO 0.375 0.375 185.00 131.00 69.38 49.13 49.13 Rate reduced to 85% USAO 0.125 0.125 275.00 255.00 34.38 31.88 31.88 Rate reduced to Laffey (14-15) Preparation of Due Process letter Preparation of Exhibits Preparation of experts Telephone communication with L. Levisohn Telephone communications with D. Douglas Telephone communication with 02/25/15 DCM A. McLaughlin 3.875 3.875 450.00 450.00 1,743.75 1,743.75 1,743.75 - 02/24/15 AS Intraoffice communication regarding Due Process Exhibits Telephone communication with 02/24/15 JH client Intraoffice communication with D.C. McAndrews regarding 02/24/15 CEM Hearing 02/25/15 JH Initial Preparation of Exhibits Preparation of Exhibits 1.250 1.250 185.00 131.00 231.25 163.75 163.75 Rate reduced to 85% USAO 02/26/15 AS Telephone communication with client regarding Hearing 0.125 0.125 155.00 116.00 19.38 14.50 14.50 Rate reduced to 75% USAO Intraoffice communication with D.C. McAndrews regarding transportation, Due Process Hearing, compensatory education and S/L Review of correspondence from counsel, M. Washington, regarding transportation Intraoffice communication with A. Sauer regarding IEP and residence Review of correspondence from N. Gregorson regarding Due Process Hearing Review of correspondence from 02/26/15 CEM A. McLaughlin regarding same 0.875 Review of School District 02/27/15 DCM Motion to Dismiss 0.125 0.500 275.00 255.00 240.63 127.50 127.50 Hours reduced (IEP); Rate reduced to Laffey (14-15) 0.125 450.00 450.00 56.25 56.25 56.25 - Review of Five-Day Notice Intraoffice communication with D.C. McAndrews, K. Conaboy and Evaluators regarding Due 02/27/15 CEM Process Hearing and Exhibits 0.500 275.00 255.00 137.50 127.50 127.50 Rate reduced to Laffey (14-15) 0.500 Intraoffice communication with D.C. McAndrews regarding exhibits Intraoffice communication with A. Sauer and D.C. McAndrews regarding residence and Due Process Hearing Intraoffice communication with D.C. McAndrews regarding 03/01/15 CEM Motion Preparation of Reply to Motion 03/02/15 DCM to Dismiss Finalization of Due Process 03/02/15 JH Exhibit Books N ot es ar d A w A dj us te d ed Fe eC re di te d H Civil Action No. 15 851 (ESH) Fe eC la im ed H ou rs C re di te d R at eC la im ed R at eC re di te d Page 56 of 104 ou rs C la im or m ed W or k Pe rf ls In iti a D at e Attachment to Mem. Op. [ECF No. 30] Rate reduced to Laffey (14-15) 0.500 0.500 275.00 255.00 137.50 127.50 127.50 0.875 0.875 450.00 450.00 393.75 393.75 393.75 1.000 1.000 185.00 131.00 185.00 131.00 131.00 Rate reduced to 85% USAO Review of Motion to Dismiss Intraoffice communication with D.C. McAndrews regarding same Intraoffice communication with A. Sauer regarding housing for Due Process Hearing Intraoffice communication with D.C. McAndrews regarding Due Process Hearing Review of file materials regarding exhibits Intraoffice communication with D.C. McAndrews, E. Gilmore regarding Response to Motion to 1.250 03/02/15 CEM Dismiss 1.250 275.00 255.00 343.75 318.75 318.75 Rate reduced to Laffey (14-15) Review of correspondence from 03/03/15 DCM counsel, M. Washington 0.125 0.125 450.00 450.00 56.25 56.25 56.25 03/03/15 JH 0.125 0.125 185.00 131.00 23.13 16.38 16.38 Rate reduced to 85% USAO Intraoffice communication with D.C. McAndrews regarding Motion and Disclosures Review of correspondence from A. McLaughlin regarding Due Process Hearing Intraoffice communication with A. Sauer regarding services and transportation Intraoffice communication with D.C. McAndrews, E. Gilmore and J. Hardy regarding 0.750 03/03/15 CEM Disclosures 0.750 275.00 255.00 206.25 191.25 191.25 Rate reduced to Laffey (14-15) Correspondence with counsel N ot es ar d A w A dj us te d ed Fe eC re di te d H Review of file materials/Intraoffice communication regarding School District records receipt Telephone communication with L. Levisohn Research regarding Due Process Review of correspondence from A. McLaughlin Preparation of correspondence to A. McLaughlin Preparation of correspondence to Hearing Officer Review of correspondence from 2.250 03/04/15 DCM Hearing Officer Civil Action No. 15 851 (ESH) Fe eC la im ed H ou rs C re di te d R at eC la im ed R at eC re di te d Page 57 of 104 ou rs C la im or m ed W or k Pe rf ls In iti a D at e Attachment to Mem. Op. [ECF No. 30] 2.250 450.00 450.00 1,012.50 1,012.50 1,012.50 - 0.750 0.750 155.00 116.00 116.25 87.00 87.00 Rate reduced to 75% USAO Intraoffice communication with D.C. McAndrews regarding objections, Disclosures and Due Process Hearing Intraoffice communication with A. Sauer regarding Disclosures, telephone call with OSSE and services Intraoffice communication with D.C. McAndrews, J. Hardy and H.B. Konkler-Goldsmith regarding same Research regarding services Review of correspondence from Hearing Officer regarding 1.375 03/04/15 CEM Disclosures 1.375 275.00 255.00 378.13 350.63 350.63 Rate reduced to Laffey (14-15) 1.375 450.00 450.00 618.75 618.75 618.75 - 0.250 155.00 116.00 38.75 29.00 29.00 Rate reduced to 75% USAO 03/04/15 AS Telephone communication with OSSE Transportation regarding location/address Telephone communication with client regarding housing, attendance and transportation Review of correspondences from A. Washington Preparation of correspondences to A. Washington Review of correspondence from counsel, M. Washington Preparation of correspondence to counsel Review of School District records 1.375 03/05/15 DCM Preparation for Due Process Telephone communication with client regarding assistance and Hearing 0.250 03/05/15 AS N ot es ar d ed A w A dj us te d H Fe eC re di te d Pe k W or Civil Action No. 15 851 (ESH) Fe eC la im ed H ou rs C re di te d R at eC la im ed R at eC re di te d Page 58 of 104 ou rs C la im or m ed rf ls In iti a D at e Attachment to Mem. Op. [ECF No. 30] Review of correspondence from counsel, M. Washington and D.C. McAndrews, regarding Disclosures Review of correspondence from D.C. McAndrews and A. McLaughlin regarding Due Process Hearing Intraoffice communication with A. Sauer and D.C. McAndrews regarding services Intraoffice communication with D.C. McAndrews regarding 0.750 03/05/15 CEM Exhibits 0.750 275.00 255.00 206.25 191.25 191.25 Telephone communication with A. McLaughlin Preparation of correspondence to 1.500 03/06/15 DCM Hearing Officer 1.500 450.00 450.00 675.00 675.00 675.00 03/06/15 JH 0.125 0.125 185.00 131.00 23.13 16.38 16.38 Rate reduced to 85% USAO 0.125 0.125 275.00 255.00 34.38 31.88 31.88 Rate reduced to Laffey (14-15) Preparation for Due Process Hearing Communications with clients Preparation of Opening Preparation of witness sheets Review of records Preparation for crossexamination Research legal issues underlying 8.500 03/08/15 DCM claims for relief 8.500 450.00 450.00 3,825.00 3,825.00 3,825.00 - Review of file materials/Intraoffice communication regarding Exhibits Preparation of correspondence to D. Douglas 0.375 0.375 185.00 131.00 69.38 49.13 49.13 Rate reduced to 85% USAO Telephone communications with client regarding Due Process Hearing and services Intraoffice communication with D.C. McAndrews regarding same Review of correspondence from D.C. McAndrews, L. Levisohn and D. Douglas regarding Due 1.000 03/08/15 CEM Process Hearing 1.000 275.00 255.00 275.00 255.00 255.00 Rate reduced to Laffey (14-15) Update case status Intraoffice communication with D.C. McAndrews regarding 03/06/15 CEM objections to disclosures 03/08/15 JH Rate reduced to Laffey (14-15) Intraoffice communication with D.C. McAndrews regarding resolution and Due Process 03/09/15 CEM Complaint Preparation for second day of 03/10/15 DCM hearing Telephone communication with 03/10/15 JH client Telephone communication with client regarding new housing and 03/11/15 AS transportation Review of correspondence from M. Acosta regarding telephone 03/11/15 CEM call with client N ot es ar d A w A dj us te d ed Fe eC re di te d H 9.500 9.500 450.00 450.00 4,275.00 4,275.00 4,275.00 - 0.500 0.500 275.00 255.00 137.50 127.50 127.50 Rate reduced to Laffey (14-15) 0.750 0.750 450.00 450.00 337.50 337.50 337.50 0.125 0.125 185.00 131.00 23.13 16.38 16.38 Rate reduced to 85% USAO 0.125 0.125 155.00 116.00 19.38 14.50 14.50 Rate reduced to 75% USAO 0.125 0.125 275.00 255.00 34.38 31.88 31.88 Rate reduced to Laffey (14-15) 13.125 450.00 450.00 5,906.25 5,906.25 5,906.25 - 0.375 230.00 230.00 86.25 86.25 86.25 - 2.250 450.00 450.00 1,012.50 1,012.50 1,012.50 0.125 185.00 131.00 23.13 16.38 16.38 Rate reduced to 85% USAO 2.625 185.00 131.00 485.63 343.88 343.88 Rate reduced to 85% USAO 0.125 275.00 255.00 34.38 31.88 31.88 Rate reduced to Laffey (14-15) 0.500 450.00 450.00 225.00 225.00 225.00 - 0.750 155.00 116.00 116.25 87.00 87.00 Rate reduced to 75% USAO 0.375 185.00 131.00 69.38 49.13 49.13 Rate reduced to 85% USAO Preparation for and attendance at Due Process Hearing 03/12/15 DCM Post-hearing research 13.125 Research regarding Due Process 03/16/15 JCL issues 0.375 Research regarding Post-Hearing submission Preparation of same Review of School District cases 03/16/15 DCM and statements regarding cases 2.250 Telephone communication with 03/16/15 JH client 0.125 Preparation of materials for PostHearing submission 2.625 Intraoffice communication with D.C. McAndrews regarding case 03/16/15 CEM law support 0.125 03/16/15 EG Review of correspondence from OSSE Preparation of correspondence to OSSE Preparation of correspondence to 03/17/15 DCM counsel, M. Washington 0.500 Review of correspondence from client regarding Hearing 03/17/15 AS transcript 0.750 03/17/15 JH Civil Action No. 15 851 (ESH) Fe eC la im Pe k W or Preparation for, travel to and attendance at Due Process Hearing Preparation for second day of 03/09/15 DCM Hearing ed H ou rs C re di te d R at eC la im ed R at eC re di te d ou rs C la im or m ed Page 59 of 104 rf ls In iti a D at e Attachment to Mem. Op. [ECF No. 30] Review of correspondence from ODR Preparation of correspondence to ODR Telephone communication with client 0.375 N ot es ar d A w A dj us te d ed Fe eC re di te d H Civil Action No. 15 851 (ESH) Fe eC la im ed H ou rs C re di te d R at eC la im ed R at eC re di te d Page 60 of 104 ou rs C la im or m ed W or k Pe rf ls In iti a D at e Attachment to Mem. Op. [ECF No. 30] Intraoffice communication with A. Sauer regarding transcript Intraoffice communication with D.C. McAndrews regarding 03/17/15 CEM same and transportation Preparation of Hearing 03/18/15 AS Transcript Request 0.375 0.375 275.00 255.00 103.13 95.63 95.63 0.500 0.500 155.00 116.00 77.50 58.00 58.00 Rate reduced to Laffey (14-15) Rate reduced to 75% USAO Intraoffice communication with A. Sauer regarding transcript Intraoffice communication with D.C. McAndrews regarding 03/18/15 CEM transcript 0.375 0.375 275.00 255.00 103.13 95.63 95.63 Rate reduced to Laffey (14-15) Review of correspondence from client Preparation of correspondence to 0.250 03/22/15 DCM client Intraoffice communication with 0.125 03/24/15 CEM D.C. McAndrews 0.250 450.00 450.00 112.50 112.50 112.50 0.125 275.00 255.00 34.38 31.88 31.88 Rate reduced to Laffey (14-15) Intraoffice communication with 03/25/15 CEM A. Sauer regarding transcript 0.125 0.125 275.00 255.00 34.38 31.88 31.88 Rate reduced to Laffey (14-15) Review of correspondence from ODR regarding Hearing Officer Decision Intraoffice communication with D.C. McAndrews regarding 0.250 03/28/15 CEM same 0.250 275.00 255.00 68.75 63.75 63.75 Rate reduced to Laffey (14-15) Review of file materials/Intraoffice communication regarding Hearing Officer Decision Preparation of appeal 03/30/15 DCM Preparation of fee materials 1.750 1.750 450.00 450.00 787.50 787.50 787.50 - Review of file materials regarding Due Process transcript 0.125 0.125 185.00 131.00 23.13 16.38 16.38 Rate reduced to 85% USAO Review of Hearing Officer Decision Intraoffice communication with D.C. McAndrews regarding same Review of correspondences from S. Cogdell regarding transcript and Hearing Officer Decision Preparation of correspondences 1.625 03/30/15 CEM to S. Cogdell regarding same 1.625 275.00 255.00 446.88 414.38 414.38 Rate reduced to Laffey (14-15) Review of file materials regarding IEP Amendment Form 0.125 0.125 185.00 131.00 23.13 16.38 16.38 Rate reduced to 85% USAO 0.250 430.00 430.00 107.50 107.50 107.50 - 03/30/15 JH 03/31/15 JH 04/01/15 HBK Review Due Process decision 0.250 N ot es ar d A w A dj us te d ed Fe eC re di te d H Civil Action No. 15 851 (ESH) Fe eC la im ed H ou rs C re di te d R at eC la im ed R at eC re di te d Page 61 of 104 ou rs C la im or m ed W or k Pe rf ls In iti a D at e Attachment to Mem. Op. [ECF No. 30] Telephone communication with client Preparation of correspondence to client 04/01/15 DCM Preparation of Appeal materials 0.625 0.625 450.00 450.00 281.25 281.25 281.25 - Intraoffice communication with D.C. McAndrews regarding Decision Review of same Intraoffice communication with J. Hardy regarding conference 04/02/15 MEG call 0.375 430.00 430.00 161.25 161.25 161.25 - Hours reduced (IEP); Rate reduced to Laffey (14-15) Intraoffice communication with D.C. McAndrews regarding Hearing Officer Decision Intraoffice communication with J. Hardy regarding intraoffice meeting Intraoffice communication with A. Sauer regarding IEP 04/02/15 CEM Amendment 04/03/15 DCM 04/03/15 CEM 04/06/15 DCM Review IEP/ESY request Review of file materials/Intraoffice communication regarding response Intraoffice communication with D.C. McAndrews regarding Amendment Telephone communication with client Intraoffice communication with D.C. McAndrews regarding IEP Amendment 0.375 0.375 0.250 275.00 255.00 103.13 63.75 63.75 0.250 0.000 450.00 450.00 112.50 0.00 0.00 0.250 0.000 275.00 255.00 68.75 0.00 0.00 0.250 0.250 450.00 450.00 112.50 112.50 112.50 Hours reduced (IEP) Hours reduced (IEP); Rate reduced to Laffey (14-15) 0.125 0.000 275.00 255.00 34.38 0.00 0.00 Hours reduced (IEP); Rate reduced to Laffey (14-15) Review of file materials/Intraoffice communication regarding Due 04/07/15 HBK Process Decision 0.250 0.250 430.00 430.00 107.50 107.50 107.50 - Review of Decision Intraoffice communication with D.C. McAndrews and H.B. Konkler-Goldsmith regarding 04/07/15 MEG same 0.750 0.750 430.00 430.00 322.50 322.50 322.50 - 0.625 0.625 450.00 450.00 281.25 281.25 281.25 04/06/15 CEM 04/07/15 DCM Preparation of appeal materials Review of file materials 04/07/15 JH regarding Complaint 0.125 0.125 185.00 131.00 23.13 16.38 16.38 Rate reduced to 85% USAO Intraoffice communication with D.C. McAndrews, H.B. KonklerGoldsmith and M. Gehring 0.375 04/07/15 CEM regarding appeal 0.375 275.00 255.00 103.13 95.63 95.63 Rate reduced to Laffey (14-15) Review of correspondence from S. Cogdell regarding compensatory education Preparation of correspondence to 0.125 04/13/15 CEM S. Cogdell regarding same 0.125 275.00 255.00 34.38 31.88 31.88 Rate reduced to Laffey (14-15) N ot es ar d A w A dj us te d ed Fe eC re di te d H Civil Action No. 15 851 (ESH) Fe eC la im ed H ou rs C re di te d R at eC la im ed R at eC re di te d Page 62 of 104 ou rs C la im or m ed W or k Pe rf ls In iti a D at e Attachment to Mem. Op. [ECF No. 30] Review of file regarding transcript 0.250 Intraoffice communication with D.C. McAndrews regarding case 0.125 04/22/15 CEM law 0.250 155.00 116.00 38.75 29.00 29.00 Rate reduced to 75% USAO 0.125 275.00 255.00 34.38 31.88 31.88 Rate reduced to Laffey (14-15) Research regarding recent cases 0.125 04/22/15 DCM regarding specificity in IEP 0.000 450.00 450.00 56.25 0.00 0.00 04/25/15 JH 0.125 185.00 131.00 23.13 16.38 16.38 Hours reduced (IEP) Rate reduced to 85% USAO 04/21/15 AS Deadlines 0.125 Review of correspondence from S. Cogdell, K. Conaboy and D.C. McAndrews Intraoffice communication with D.C. McAndrews regarding Hearing Officer Decision 0.375 04/28/15 CEM implementation Review of file, Note 05/04/15 MEG Review of documents 0.500 0.375 275.00 255.00 103.13 95.63 95.63 Rate reduced to Laffey (14-15) 0.500 430.00 430.00 215.00 215.00 215.00 - 05/05/15 DCM Preparation of appeal papers 0.250 0.250 450.00 450.00 112.50 112.50 112.50 - 0.125 0.125 155.00 116.00 19.38 14.50 14.50 0.125 0.125 185.00 131.00 23.13 16.38 16.38 Rate reduced to 75% USAO Rate reduced to 85% USAO Intraoffice communication with D.C. McAndrews and J. Hardy regarding negotiations, compensatory education and fees Intraoffice communication with A. Sauer regarding communication with client and 1.000 05/05/15 CEM compensatory education 1.000 275.00 255.00 275.00 255.00 255.00 Rate reduced to Laffey (14-15) Review of file materials/Intraoffice communication regarding compensatory education 05/06/15 DCM programs 0.250 0.250 450.00 450.00 112.50 112.50 112.50 - Intraoffice communication with C. McAndrews, J. Hardy, and D.C. McAndrews regarding billing 0.250 0.250 155.00 116.00 38.75 29.00 29.00 Rate reduced to 75% USAO Intraoffice communication with D.C. McAndrews regarding compensatory education and costs Intraoffice communication with A. Sauer, E. Gilmore and D.C. McAndrews regarding compensatory education and 05/06/15 CEM reimbursement 0.375 0.375 275.00 255.00 103.13 95.63 95.63 Rate reduced to Laffey (14-15) 05/05/15 AS 05/05/15 JH 05/06/15 AS Telephone communication with client regarding services Review of file materials regarding emails N ot es ar d A w A dj us te d ed Fe eC re di te d H Civil Action No. 15 851 (ESH) Fe eC la im Pe k W or Intraoffice communication with C. McAndrews regarding services 05/07/15 AS Intraoffice communication with A. Sauer regarding 05/07/15 CEM compensatory education Intraoffice communication with C. McAndrews and H.B. Konkler-Goldsmith 05/08/15 AS ed H ou rs C re di te d R at eC la im ed R at eC re di te d ou rs C la im or m ed Page 63 of 104 rf ls In iti a D at e Attachment to Mem. Op. [ECF No. 30] 0.250 0.250 155.00 116.00 38.75 29.00 29.00 Rate reduced to 75% USAO 0.125 0.125 275.00 255.00 34.38 31.88 31.88 Rate reduced to Laffey (14-15) 0.125 0.125 155.00 116.00 19.38 14.50 14.50 Rate reduced to 75% USAO Intraoffice communication with A. Sauer regarding compensatory education Intraoffice communication with H.B. Konkler-Goldsmith and A. Sauer regarding Due Process 0.250 05/08/15 CEM Hearing 0.250 275.00 255.00 68.75 63.75 63.75 Rate reduced to Laffey (14-15) 10.250 430.00 430.00 4,407.50 4,407.50 4,407.50 0.125 155.00 116.00 19.38 14.50 14.50 Rate reduced to 75% USAO 0.500 155.00 116.00 77.50 58.00 58.00 Rate reduced to 75% USAO 0.250 275.00 255.00 68.75 63.75 63.75 Rate reduced to Laffey (14-15) 0.125 275.00 255.00 34.38 31.88 31.88 Rate reduced to Laffey (14-15) 0.125 275.00 255.00 34.38 31.88 31.88 Rate reduced to Laffey (14-15) 0.375 0.375 275.00 255.00 103.13 95.63 95.63 0.250 0.250 155.00 116.00 38.75 29.00 29.00 Rate reduced to Laffey (14-15) Rate reduced to 75% USAO Intraoffice communication with A.Sauer regarding compensatory 0.125 05/19/15 CEM education and programming 0.125 275.00 255.00 34.38 31.88 31.88 Rate reduced to Laffey (14-15) Intraoffice communication with C. McAndrews regarding Complaint 05/20/15 MEG Update case status 0.250 430.00 430.00 107.50 107.50 107.50 - Preparation of Complaint Intraoffice communication with D.C. McAndrews regarding 10.250 05/11/15 MEG same Telephone communication with 05/11/15 AS client 0.125 Preparation of N.T. binders Review of correspondence from counsel 0.500 05/11/15 EB Intraoffice communication with A. Sauer regarding program and compensatory education Intraoffice communication with 05/11/15 CEM M. Gehring regarding Complaint 0.250 Review of correspondence from S. Cogdell regarding 0.125 05/14/15 CEM implementation Telephone communication with client regarding compensatory 0.125 05/17/15 CEM education Intraoffice communication with D.C. McAndrews regarding contact with client Intraoffice communication with A. Sauer regarding same Telephone communication with client regarding compensatory 05/18/15 CEM education Intraoffice communication with 05/19/15 AS C. McAndrews 0.250 N ot es ar d A w A dj us te d ed Fe eC re di te d H Civil Action No. 15 851 (ESH) Fe eC la im ed H ou rs C re di te d R at eC la im ed R at eC re di te d Page 64 of 104 ou rs C la im or m ed W or k Pe rf ls In iti a D at e Attachment to Mem. Op. [ECF No. 30] Preparation of Federal Court 05/20/15 DCM Complaint 0.500 0.500 450.00 450.00 225.00 225.00 225.00 - Intraoffice communication with E. Bissell regarding Complaint Intraoffice communication with C. McAndrews and D.C. 05/21/15 MEG McAndrews regarding status 0.375 0.375 430.00 430.00 161.25 161.25 161.25 - Review of file materials/Intraoffice communication regarding contacts for School District implementation Preparation of Federal Court 05/21/15 DCM Complaint 1.000 1.000 450.00 450.00 450.00 450.00 450.00 - 05/21/15 AS Intraoffice communication with C. McAndrews Preparation of correspondence to client 0.500 0.500 155.00 116.00 77.50 58.00 58.00 05/21/15 EB Review and revise Complaint 0.750 0.750 155.00 116.00 116.25 87.00 87.00 05/21/15 JH Review of email 0.125 0.125 185.00 131.00 23.13 16.38 16.38 Rate reduced to 75% USAO Rate reduced to 75% USAO Rate reduced to 85% USAO 0.625 275.00 255.00 171.88 159.38 159.38 Rate reduced to Laffey (14-15) 0.250 155.00 116.00 38.75 29.00 29.00 0.125 185.00 131.00 23.13 16.38 16.38 Rate reduced to 75% USAO Rate reduced to 85% USAO 0.250 0.250 430.00 430.00 107.50 107.50 107.50 - Intraoffice communication with 05/27/15 CEM M. Gehring regarding Complaint 0.125 0.125 275.00 255.00 34.38 31.88 31.88 Rate reduced to Laffey (14-15) Intraoffice communication with J. Hardy and C. McAndrews regarding status 05/28/15 MEG Update case status 0.250 0.250 430.00 430.00 107.50 107.50 107.50 - 05/28/15 DCM Preparation of Complaint 0.125 0.125 450.00 450.00 56.25 56.25 56.25 - Intraoffice communication with 05/28/15 CEM J. Hardy regarding appeal 0.250 0.250 275.00 255.00 68.75 63.75 63.75 Rate reduced to Laffey (14-15) 05/29/15 MEG Review and revise Complaint 0.625 0.625 430.00 430.00 268.75 268.75 268.75 - Preparation of correspondences to S. Cogdell regarding compensatory education Preparation of correspondence to client regarding contact Intraoffice communication with D.C. McAndrews regarding Complaint, Hearing Officer Decision implementation and 0.625 05/21/15 CEM appeal Intraoffice communication with C. McAndrews, D.C. McAndrews and J. Hardy 0.250 05/22/15 AS Review of file materials 05/23/15 JH regarding deadlines 0.125 Update case status Intraoffice communication with 05/27/15 MEG C. McAndrews regarding status N ot es ar d A w A dj us te d ed Fe eC re di te d H Civil Action No. 15 851 (ESH) Fe eC la im ed H ou rs C re di te d R at eC la im ed R at eC re di te d Page 65 of 104 ou rs C la im or m ed W or k Pe rf ls In iti a D at e Attachment to Mem. Op. [ECF No. 30] 06/01/15 DCM Preparation of Complaint Preparation of CV for D.C. 06/02/15 EB McAndrews 0.500 0.500 450.00 450.00 225.00 225.00 225.00 0.125 0.125 155.00 116.00 19.38 14.50 14.50 Rate reduced to 75% USAO Preparation of fee materials Intraoffice communication with A. Sauer regarding 06/03/15 CEM communication with client 0.500 0.500 275.00 275.00 137.50 137.50 137.50 - Intraoffice communication with C. McAndrews and D.C. 06/03/15 MEG McAndrews regarding status 0.375 0.375 430.00 430.00 161.25 161.25 161.25 - Review of correspondence from S. Cogdell regarding compensatory education Review of file materials regarding same Intraoffice communication with D.C. McAndrews regarding 0.375 06/05/15 CEM expert Telephone communication with 06/05/15 DCM counsel, V. Porter 0.250 0.375 275.00 275.00 103.13 103.13 103.13 - 0.250 450.00 450.00 112.50 112.50 112.50 - Intraoffice communication with D.C. McAndrews and A. Sauer regarding Hearing Officer Decision implementation Intraoffice communication with D.C. McAndrews regarding 06/08/15 CEM communication with client 0.250 0.250 275.00 275.00 68.75 68.75 68.75 - Intraoffice communication with 06/09/15 MEG J. Hardy regarding filing 0.125 0.125 430.00 430.00 53.75 53.75 53.75 - Preparation of Complaint Review of file materials/Intraoffice 06/09/15 DCM communication regarding same 0.250 0.250 450.00 450.00 112.50 112.50 112.50 - 0.125 0.125 155.00 116.00 19.38 14.50 14.50 Rate reduced to 75% USAO 1.000 1.000 185.00 131.00 185.00 131.00 131.00 Rate reduced to 85% USAO 0.625 0.625 275.00 275.00 171.88 171.88 171.88 - 06/09/15 AS 06/09/15 JH Telephone communication with client Intraoffice communication with C. McAndrews, D.C. McAndrews and J. Hardy Preparation of Complaint documents Finalize Complaint Intraoffice communication regarding Federal Complaint Intraoffice communication with J. Hardy regarding Summons and Judge Intraoffice communication with D.C. McAndrews and J. Hardy 06/10/15 CEM regarding Complaint Intraoffice communication with 06/10/15 MEG J. Hardy regarding status Preparation of materials to 06/10/15 DCM accompany Complaint Intraoffice communication with C. McAndrews, D.C. McAndrews and J. Hardy 06/10/15 AS N ot es ar d A w A dj us te d ed Fe eC re di te d H Civil Action No. 15 851 (ESH) Fe eC la im ed H ou rs C re di te d R at eC la im ed R at eC re di te d Page 66 of 104 ou rs C la im or m ed W or k Pe rf ls In iti a D at e Attachment to Mem. Op. [ECF No. 30] 0.250 0.250 430.00 430.00 107.50 107.50 107.50 - 0.250 0.250 450.00 450.00 112.50 112.50 112.50 - 0.125 0.125 155.00 116.00 19.38 14.50 14.50 Rate reduced to 75% USAO Telephone communication with R. Dawson, District Court Federal District Court Finalize Notice Preparation of Certificate of Service Intraoffice communication 0.500 06/10/15 JH Review of correspondence from J. Michney regarding 0.125 06/12/15 CEM compensatory education 0.500 185.00 131.00 92.50 65.50 65.50 Rate reduced to 85% USAO 0.125 275.00 275.00 34.38 34.38 34.38 - Intraoffice communication with D.C. McAndrews regarding compensatory education Intraoffice communication with D.C. McAndrews and J. Hardy regarding negotiations and 06/14/15 CEM Complaint 0.375 0.375 275.00 275.00 103.13 103.13 103.13 - Intraoffice communication with 06/15/15 CEM J. Hardy regarding Complaint 0.125 0.125 275.00 275.00 34.38 34.38 34.38 - Intraoffice communication with 06/15/15 MEG J. Hardy regarding service 0.125 0.125 430.00 430.00 53.75 53.75 53.75 - Review of file materials regarding Complaint Preparation of correspondence to counsel, L. George 0.375 0.375 185.00 131.00 69.38 49.13 49.13 Rate reduced to 85% USAO 0.500 275.00 275.00 137.50 137.50 137.50 - 0.125 275.00 275.00 34.38 34.38 34.38 - 0.625 0.625 450.00 450.00 281.25 281.25 281.25 0.125 0.125 155.00 116.00 19.38 14.50 14.50 Rate reduced to 75% USAO 0.250 0.250 450.00 450.00 112.50 112.50 112.50 - 0.250 0.000 275.00 275.00 68.75 0.00 0.00 Hours reduced (RSM) 06/15/15 JH Review of Complaint Preparation of correspondence to J. Michney regarding 0.500 06/16/15 CEM compensatory education Intraoffice communication with D.C. McAndrews regarding 0.125 06/18/15 CEM resolution Telephone communications with counsel, L. George Preparation of correspondence to 06/18/15 DCM counsel, A. Crawford Intraoffice communication with 06/18/15 AS C. McAndrews Research regarding 06/19/15 DCM compensatory education Intraoffice communication with D.C. McAndrews regarding 06/20/15 CEM resolution Intraoffice communication with A. Sauer regarding 06/30/15 CEM compensatory education N ot es ar d A w A dj us te d ed Fe eC re di te d H Civil Action No. 15 851 (ESH) Fe eC la im ed H ou rs C re di te d R at eC la im ed R at eC re di te d Page 67 of 104 ou rs C la im or m ed W or k Pe rf ls In iti a D at e Attachment to Mem. Op. [ECF No. 30] 0.125 0.125 275.00 275.00 34.38 34.38 34.38 0.125 0.125 155.00 116.00 19.38 14.50 14.50 0.125 0.125 155.00 116.00 19.38 14.50 14.50 Rate reduced to 75% USAO Rate reduced to 75% USAO 0.125 0.125 0.125 0.125 275.00 430.00 275.00 430.00 34.38 53.75 34.38 53.75 34.38 53.75 - Review of correspondence from A. Crawford regarding reimbursement Intraoffice communication with 07/06/15 CEM E. Gilmore regarding same 0.250 0.250 275.00 275.00 68.75 68.75 68.75 - Review of file materials/Intraoffice communication regarding 07/06/15 DCM implementation issues 0.250 0.250 450.00 450.00 112.50 112.50 112.50 - Preparation of correspondence to A. Crawford regarding reimbursement Intraoffice communication with D.C. McAndrews regarding 07/07/15 CEM same 0.250 0.250 275.00 275.00 68.75 68.75 68.75 - 0.125 0.125 155.00 116.00 19.38 14.50 14.50 Rate reduced to 75% USAO Preparation of correspondence to counsel, A. Crawford, regarding IEE reimbursement and global 07/15/15 DCM settlement 0.375 0.375 450.00 450.00 168.75 168.75 168.75 - 06/30/15 AS 07/01/15 AS Telephone communication with client Intraoffice communication with C. McAndrews Telephone communication with client Intraoffice communication with 07/02/15 CEM J. Hardy regarding transcript 07/02/15 MEG Update case status 07/08/15 AS Telephone communication with client Intraoffice communication with C. McAndrews - N ot es ar d A w A dj us te d ed Fe eC re di te d H Civil Action No. 15 851 (ESH) Fe eC la im ed H ou rs C re di te d R at eC la im ed R at eC re di te d Page 68 of 104 ou rs C la im or m ed W or k Pe rf ls In iti a D at e Attachment to Mem. Op. [ECF No. 30] Review of correspondence from A. Crawford regarding reimbursement Review of correspondence from L. Levisohn regarding invoice Intraoffice communication with D.C. McAndrews regarding same Intraoffice communication with J. Hardy regarding service Review of correspondence from A. Crawford, D.C. McAndrews, and E. Gilmore regarding reimbursement Review of correspondence from D.C. McAndrews and A. Crawford regarding reimbursesment Review of correspondence from counsel, M. Washington regarding settlement Review of correspondence from D.C. McAndrews regarding 0.750 07/16/15 CEM invoice 0.750 275.00 275.00 206.25 206.25 206.25 - Review of correspondence from counsel, A. Crawford Preparation of correspondence to 0.375 07/16/15 DCM counsel 0.375 450.00 450.00 168.75 168.75 168.75 - Review of file materials/Intraoffice communication regarding service Preparation of correspondence to counsel Preparation of services documents 1.375 1.375 185.00 131.00 254.38 180.13 180.13 Rate reduced to 85% USAO Review of correspondence from counsel, L. George, regarding service Intraoffice communication with D.C. McAndrews regarding 0.125 07/27/15 CEM same 0.125 275.00 275.00 34.38 34.38 34.38 - 0.250 0.250 430.00 430.00 107.50 107.50 107.50 - 0.125 0.125 450.00 450.00 56.25 56.25 56.25 - 0.125 0.125 275.00 275.00 34.38 34.38 34.38 - 0.125 0.125 275.00 275.00 34.38 34.38 34.38 - 07/16/15 JH 07/27/15 MEG 07/29/15 DCM 07/30/15 CEM 08/03/15 CEM Review of correspondence from counsel Review of email regarding service Review of correspondence from counsel, L. George regarding service Intraoffice communication with D.C. McAndrews regarding service Review of memorandum regarding service of process Intraoffice communication with D.C. McAndrews regarding service of process Intraoffice communication with A. Sauer regarding call with 08/05/15 CEM client N ot es ar d A w A dj us te d ed Fe eC re di te d H Civil Action No. 15 851 (ESH) Fe eC la im ed H ou rs C re di te d R at eC la im ed R at eC re di te d Page 69 of 104 ou rs C la im or m ed W or k Pe rf ls In iti a D at e Attachment to Mem. Op. [ECF No. 30] 0.375 0.375 275.00 275.00 103.13 103.13 103.13 - Review of correspondence from counsel, L. Gease Research regarding service of 0.500 08/05/15 DCM process 0.500 450.00 450.00 225.00 225.00 225.00 - 0.125 0.125 155.00 116.00 19.38 14.50 14.50 Rate reduced to 75% USAO 0.125 0.125 155.00 116.00 19.38 14.50 14.50 Rate reduced to 75% USAO 0.125 0.125 275.00 275.00 34.38 34.38 34.38 - 0.250 0.250 450.00 450.00 112.50 112.50 112.50 - Intraoffice communication with H.B. Konkler-Goldsmith regarding Hearing Officer Decision Intraoffice communication with A. Sauer regarding same Intraoffice communication with J. Hardy, D.C. McAndrews and M. Gehring regarding service of 0.500 08/10/15 CEM process 0.500 275.00 275.00 137.50 137.50 137.50 - Intraoffice communication with C. McAndrews regarding 08/10/15 HBK Hearing Officer Decision 0.125 430.00 430.00 53.75 53.75 53.75 - 0.375 430.00 430.00 161.25 161.25 161.25 - 08/05/15 AS Intraoffice communication with C. McAndrews Telephone communication with client Telephone communication with client Intraoffice communication with C. McAndrews 08/06/15 AS Intraoffice communication with A. Sauer regarding 08/07/15 CEM communication with client Review of file materials/Intraoffice communication regarding 08/07/15 DCM service and settlement 0.125 Intraoffice communication with D.C. McAndrews and J. Hardy regarding service 0.375 08/10/15 MEG Research regarding same Research Preparation of documents for 0.250 08/10/15 DCM personal services Intraoffice communication with C. McAndrews, J. Hardy and M. Gehring 0.125 08/10/15 AS 0.250 450.00 450.00 112.50 112.50 112.50 - 0.125 155.00 116.00 19.38 14.50 14.50 Rate reduced to 75% USAO Review of file materials/Intraoffice communication regarding service Preparation of correspondence to client 0.375 0.375 185.00 131.00 69.38 49.13 49.13 Rate reduced to 85% USAO 08/10/15 JH N ot es ar d A w A dj us te d ed Fe eC re di te d H Civil Action No. 15 851 (ESH) Fe eC la im ed H ou rs C re di te d R at eC la im ed R at eC re di te d Page 70 of 104 ou rs C la im or m ed W or k Pe rf ls In iti a D at e Attachment to Mem. Op. [ECF No. 30] Intraoffice communication with D.C. McAndrews and J. Hardy regarding service of process Intraoffice communication with A. Sauer regarding same Review of correspondence to 08/11/15 CEM process server 0.500 0.500 275.00 275.00 137.50 137.50 137.50 - Intraoffice communication with J. Hardy and D.C. McAndrews 08/11/15 MEG regarding service 0.250 0.250 430.00 430.00 107.50 107.50 107.50 - 0.125 0.125 155.00 116.00 19.38 14.50 14.50 Rate reduced to 75% USAO 0.250 0.250 185.00 131.00 46.25 32.75 32.75 Rate reduced to 85% USAO 0.125 0.125 275.00 275.00 34.38 34.38 34.38 - Intraoffice communication with 08/20/15 CEM J. Hardy regarding service 0.250 0.250 275.00 275.00 68.75 68.75 68.75 - Intraoffice communication with J. Hardy regarding status 08/20/15 MEG Research 0.375 0.375 430.00 430.00 161.25 161.25 161.25 - 0.250 0.250 450.00 450.00 112.50 112.50 112.50 Telephone communication with client Intraoffice communication with 08/11/15 AS C. McAndrews Review of file materials regarding service 08/11/15 JH Preparation of email Intraoffice communication with J. Hardy regarding 08/18/15 CEM reimbursement Review of file materials/Intraoffice communication regarding 08/20/15 DCM service of process Review of file materials 08/23/15 JH regarding deadlines Intraoffice communication with 08/24/15 AS C. McAndrews 0.125 0.125 185.00 131.00 23.13 16.38 16.38 0.125 0.125 155.00 116.00 19.38 14.50 14.50 Rate reduced to 85% USAO Rate reduced to 75% USAO Review of file materials regarding service of process Intraoffice communication with 08/25/15 CEM A. Sauer regarding service 0.375 0.375 275.00 275.00 103.13 103.13 103.13 - Preparation of correspondence to Office of Attorney General Intraoffice communication with C. McAndrews 0.500 0.500 155.00 116.00 77.50 58.00 58.00 Rate reduced to 75% USAO 0.250 0.250 275.00 275.00 68.75 68.75 68.75 - Review of file materials/Intraoffice communication regarding settlement, service of Complaint 08/28/15 DCM and implementation 0.250 0.250 450.00 450.00 112.50 112.50 112.50 - 08/25/15 AS Intraoffice communication with D.C. McAndrews regarding negotiation Intraoffice communication with 08/28/15 CEM J. Hardy regarding service Review of file materials regarding emails and Notification of Service N ot es ar d A w A dj us te d ed Fe eC re di te d H Civil Action No. 15 851 (ESH) Fe eC la im ed H ou rs C re di te d R at eC la im ed R at eC re di te d Page 71 of 104 ou rs C la im or m ed W or k Pe rf ls In iti a D at e Attachment to Mem. Op. [ECF No. 30] Rate reduced to 85% USAO 0.250 0.250 185.00 131.00 46.25 32.75 32.75 Review of correspondences from J. Michney regarding compensatory education Preparation of correspondence to 0.250 08/31/15 CEM J. Michney regarding same 0.250 275.00 275.00 68.75 68.75 68.75 08/31/15 JH 0.125 0.125 185.00 131.00 23.13 16.38 16.38 Rate reduced to 85% USAO 0.125 0.125 155.00 116.00 19.38 14.50 14.50 Rate reduced to 75% USAO 0.125 0.125 275.00 275.00 34.38 34.38 34.38 - 0.250 0.250 275.00 275.00 68.75 68.75 68.75 - 0.250 0.250 185.00 131.00 46.25 32.75 32.75 Rate reduced to 85% USAO Review of correspondence from 09/04/15 CEM Court regarding Answer 0.125 0.125 275.00 275.00 34.38 34.38 34.38 - 0.125 430.00 430.00 53.75 53.75 53.75 - 0.125 450.00 450.00 56.25 56.25 56.25 08/28/15 JH Review of file materials Intraoffice communication with C. McAndrews, J. Hardy Intraoffice communication with J. Hardy regarding proof of 09/02/15 CEM service Telephone communication with 09/03/15 CEM counsel Review of file materials regarding Affidavits Finalize same 09/03/15 JH 08/31/15 AS Intraoffice communication with D.C. McAndrews and C. 0.125 09/04/15 MEG McAndrews regarding status Review of correspondence from 09/04/15 DCM Clerk's Office 0.125 Review of file materials 09/04/15 JH regarding service 0.125 0.125 185.00 131.00 23.13 16.38 16.38 Rate reduced to 85% USAO Preparation of correspondences to counsel Review of correspondences from counsel 0.500 09/11/15 MEG Review of Complaint 0.500 430.00 430.00 215.00 215.00 215.00 - Intraoffice communication with 09/14/15 CEM J. Hardy regarding counsel 0.125 0.125 275.00 275.00 34.38 34.38 34.38 - Intraoffice communication with A. Sauer regarding counseling Intraoffice communication with M. Gehring regarding Complaint and communication with School District Intraoffice communication with 0.625 09/15/15 CEM J. Hardy regarding counsel 0.625 275.00 275.00 171.88 171.88 171.88 - Intraoffice communication with C. McAndrews regarding status Preparation of correspondence to counsel Amended Complaint Telephone communication with 0.750 09/15/15 MEG counsel 0.750 430.00 430.00 322.50 322.50 322.50 - N ot es ar d A w A dj us te d ed Fe eC re di te d H Civil Action No. 15 851 (ESH) Fe eC la im ed H ou rs C re di te d R at eC la im ed R at eC re di te d Page 72 of 104 ou rs C la im or m ed W or k Pe rf ls In iti a D at e Attachment to Mem. Op. [ECF No. 30] 09/15/15 AS Telephone communication with client Intraoffice communication with C. McAndrews 0.125 0.125 155.00 116.00 19.38 14.50 14.50 Rate reduced to 75% USAO 09/15/15 JH Review of file materials/Intraoffice communication regarding Amended Complaint Finalize same 0.375 0.375 185.00 131.00 69.38 49.13 49.13 Rate reduced to 85% USAO Review of correspondence from counsel Preparation of correspondence to counsel Intraoffice communication with 09/16/15 MEG J. Hardy regarding Complaint 0.500 0.500 430.00 430.00 215.00 215.00 215.00 - 0.500 0.500 185.00 131.00 92.50 65.50 65.50 Rate reduced to 85% USAO 0.250 0.250 275.00 275.00 68.75 68.75 68.75 - Intraoffice communication with 09/18/15 CEM M. Gehring regarding Complaint 0.125 0.125 275.00 275.00 34.38 34.38 34.38 - Intraoffice communication with 09/18/15 MEG C. McAndrews regarding status 0.125 0.125 430.00 430.00 53.75 53.75 53.75 - 0.125 0.125 0.125 0.125 430.00 430.00 430.00 430.00 53.75 53.75 53.75 53.75 53.75 53.75 - 0.125 0.125 430.00 430.00 53.75 53.75 53.75 0.125 0.125 155.00 116.00 19.38 14.50 14.50 Rate reduced to 75% USAO Research regarding statute of limitations Intraoffice communication 09/30/15 CEM regarding same 0.250 0.250 275.00 275.00 68.75 68.75 68.75 - Research regarding statute of limitations and compensatory education Preparation of materials 09/30/15 DCM regarding same 1.250 1.250 450.00 450.00 562.50 562.50 562.50 - Research regarding resolution Telephone communication with A. Finkhousen regarding case law and resolution Preparation of correspondence to 10/01/15 CEM A. Finkhousen regarding same 0.875 0.875 275.00 275.00 240.63 240.63 240.63 - Review of file materials regarding Amended Complaint and Entry of Appearance Finalize same Preparation of Certificate of 09/16/15 JH Service Intraoffice communication with A. Sauer regarding counseling 09/17/15 CEM and LRE Review of file materials/Intraoffice 09/24/15 HBK communication regarding status 09/24/15 MEG Update case status Intraoffice communication 09/24/15 MJC regarding status Intraoffice communication regarding status 09/24/15 AB N ot es ar d A w A dj us te d ed Fe eC re di te d H Civil Action No. 15 851 (ESH) Fe eC la im ed H ou rs C re di te d R at eC la im ed R at eC re di te d Page 73 of 104 ou rs C la im or m ed W or k Pe rf ls In iti a D at e Attachment to Mem. Op. [ECF No. 30] Intraoffice communication with C. McAndrews regarding status Review of C. McAndrews email 0.375 10/01/15 MEG to A. Finkhousen 0.375 430.00 430.00 161.25 161.25 161.25 - Intraoffice communication with D.C. McAndrews regarding Answer and resolution Review of correspondence from counsel Preparation of correspondence to 0.250 10/02/15 CEM counsel 0.250 275.00 275.00 68.75 68.75 68.75 - Review of email from Court Intraoffice communication with J. Hardy regarding Answer Review of documents for call with Court Intraoffice communication with J. Hardy regarding conference call Telephone communication with counsel Conference call with Court Review of correspondence from counsel Preparation of correspondence to 1.625 10/02/15 MEG counsel 1.625 430.00 430.00 698.75 698.75 698.75 - Review of file materials/Intraoffice communication regarding settlement issues 10/02/15 DCM Review Answer of Defendant 0.250 0.250 450.00 450.00 112.50 112.50 112.50 - 0.250 0.125 0.250 0.125 185.00 430.00 131.00 430.00 46.25 53.75 32.75 53.75 32.75 53.75 0.125 0.125 185.00 131.00 23.13 16.38 16.38 Rate reduced to 85% USAO Rate reduced to 85% USAO 0.125 0.125 275.00 275.00 34.38 34.38 34.38 - Review of correspondences from counsel Preparation of correspondences to counsel Review of Answer 0.875 10/09/15 MEG Update case status 0.875 430.00 430.00 376.25 376.25 376.25 - 0.625 0.625 185.00 131.00 115.63 81.88 81.88 Rate reduced to 85% USAO Intraoffice communication with 10/15/15 CEM M. Gehring regarding resolution 0.125 0.125 275.00 275.00 34.38 34.38 34.38 - Preparation of email to Chambers Review of emails regarding conference call 10/02/15 JH 10/05/15 MEG Review of Court Order Review of file materials 10/05/15 JH regarding deadlines Intraoffice communication with M. Gehring regarding Amended 10/09/15 CEM Answer 10/11/15 JH Review of file materials regarding Order and deadlines Telephone communication with counsel, A. Finkhousen, 10/16/15 CEM regarding resolution N ot es ar d A w A dj us te d ed Fe eC re di te d H Civil Action No. 15 851 (ESH) Fe eC la im ed H ou rs C re di te d R at eC la im ed R at eC re di te d Page 74 of 104 ou rs C la im or m ed W or k Pe rf ls In iti a D at e Attachment to Mem. Op. [ECF No. 30] 0.125 0.125 275.00 275.00 34.38 34.38 34.38 - Review of Court Notice 10/20/15 MEG Review of Amended Complaint 0.250 0.250 430.00 430.00 107.50 107.50 107.50 - 0.125 0.125 185.00 131.00 23.13 16.38 16.38 Rate reduced to 85% USAO 0.125 0.125 275.00 275.00 34.38 34.38 34.38 - Review of Defendant's Motion to 10/21/15 DCM File Amended Pleadings 0.250 0.250 450.00 450.00 112.50 112.50 112.50 - Preparation of correspondence to DCPS regarding Compliance Case Manager Preparation of correspondence to A. Anokye regarding conference call Review of correspondence from 0.375 10/22/15 CEM A. Anokye regarding same 0.375 275.00 275.00 103.13 103.13 103.13 - Review of file materials/Intraoffice 10/22/15 DCM communication regarding status 0.125 0.125 450.00 450.00 56.25 56.25 56.25 - Intraoffice communication with H.B. Konkler-Goldsmith, A. Sauer regarding negotiations Telephone communication with 10/23/15 CEM A. Anokye regarding resolution 0.250 0.250 275.00 275.00 68.75 68.75 68.75 - 0.125 0.125 430.00 430.00 53.75 53.75 53.75 - 0.125 0.125 155.00 116.00 19.38 14.50 14.50 Rate reduced to 75% USAO 0.125 275.00 275.00 34.38 34.38 34.38 - 0.125 275.00 275.00 34.38 34.38 34.38 - 0.500 450.00 450.00 225.00 225.00 225.00 - 0.125 275.00 275.00 34.38 34.38 34.38 - Review of file materials regarding Motion for Leave to File Answer to Amended Complaint 10/20/15 JH Intraoffice communication with J. Hardy regarding Amended 10/21/15 CEM Answer Intraoffice communication with C. McAndrews and A. Sauer 10/23/15 HBK regarding negotiations Intraoffice communication with C. McAndrews and H.B. Konkler-Goldsmith 10/23/15 AS Preparation of correspondence to 10/24/15 CEM A. Anokye regarding resolution 0.125 Review of correspondence from A. Anokye regarding conference 0.125 10/26/15 CEM call Research regarding statute of 10/26/15 DCM limitations 0.500 Preparation of correspondence to A. Anokye regarding conference 0.125 10/27/15 CEM call N ot es ar d A w A dj us te d ed Fe eC re di te d H Civil Action No. 15 851 (ESH) Fe eC la im ed H ou rs C re di te d R at eC la im ed R at eC re di te d Page 75 of 104 ou rs C la im or m ed W or k Pe rf ls In iti a D at e Attachment to Mem. Op. [ECF No. 30] Intraoffice communication with A. Sauer regarding meeting Telephone communication with 11/02/15 CEM A. Anokye regarding resolution 0.250 0.250 275.00 275.00 68.75 68.75 68.75 - Intraoffice communication with C. McAndrews Telephone communication with client 0.125 0.125 155.00 116.00 19.38 14.50 14.50 Rate reduced to 75% USAO Telephone communication with 11/03/15 CEM A. Anokye regarding resolution 0.125 0.125 275.00 275.00 34.38 34.38 34.38 - Intraoffice communication with C. McAndrews Telephone communication with client 0.125 0.125 155.00 116.00 19.38 14.50 14.50 Rate reduced to 75% USAO Telephone communication with A. Anokye regarding settlement Intraoffice communication with 0.250 11/04/15 CEM A. Sauer regarding behavior 0.250 275.00 275.00 68.75 68.75 68.75 - 0.125 0.125 155.00 116.00 19.38 14.50 14.50 Rate reduced to 75% USAO Telephone communication with counsel, M. Washington, regarding resolution Preparation of correspondence to 0.250 11/05/15 CEM counsel regarding same 0.250 275.00 275.00 68.75 68.75 68.75 - 0.125 0.125 155.00 116.00 19.38 14.50 14.50 Rate reduced to 75% USAO 0.125 0.125 155.00 116.00 19.38 14.50 14.50 Rate reduced to 75% USAO 0.125 0.125 275.00 275.00 34.38 34.38 34.38 - 0.125 0.125 155.00 116.00 19.38 14.50 14.50 Rate reduced to 75% USAO 0.250 0.250 450.00 450.00 112.50 112.50 112.50 - Telephone communication with client Preparation of correspondence to client Intraoffice communication with C. McAndrews 0.125 0.125 155.00 116.00 19.38 14.50 14.50 Rate reduced to 75% USAO 11/02/15 AS 11/03/15 AS 11/04/15 AS 11/05/15 AS Intraoffice communication with C. McAndrews Telephone communication with client Intraoffice communication with C. McAndrews Telephone communication with client Telephone communication with client Intraoffice communication with C. McAndrews 11/06/15 AS Intraoffice communication with A. Sauer regarding 11/10/15 CEM communication with client 11/10/15 AS Telephone communication with client Intraoffice communication with C. McAndrews Review of file materials/Intraoffice communication regarding 11/13/15 DCM implementation issues 11/13/15 AS N ot es ar d A w A dj us te d ed Fe eC re di te d H Intraoffice communication with D.C. McAndrews regarding negotiations Intraoffice communication with 11/13/15 CEM A. Sauer regarding IEP Meeting 0.500 Intraoffice communication with 11/16/15 AS C. McAndrews 0.125 Civil Action No. 15 851 (ESH) Fe eC la im ed H ou rs C re di te d R at eC la im ed R at eC re di te d Page 76 of 104 ou rs C la im or m ed W or k Pe rf ls In iti a D at e Attachment to Mem. Op. [ECF No. 30] 0.250 275.00 275.00 137.50 68.75 68.75 0.125 155.00 116.00 19.38 14.50 14.50 Hours reduced (IEP) Rate reduced to 75% USAO Intraoffice communication with A. Sauer regarding behavior meeting Preparation of correspondence to 11/16/15 CEM client regarding same 0.375 Review of behavior reports 11/17/15 DCM Preparation for meeting 0.250 0.000 275.00 275.00 103.13 0.00 0.00 Hours reduced (noncompensable) 0.250 450.00 450.00 112.50 112.50 112.50 - Intraoffice communication with C. McAndrews Review of correspondence from client 0.125 0.125 155.00 116.00 19.38 14.50 14.50 Rate reduced to 75% USAO Intraoffice communication with A. Sauer regarding behavior meeting Review of correspondences from client regarding discipline and meeting Review of file materials regarding behavior Intraoffice communication with D.C. McAndrews regarding meeting Preparation of correspondence to client regarding same Travel to and attendance at MDT 11/17/15 CEM Meeting 3.500 0.250 11/18/15 MEG Review of Court Order 0.000 0.250 275.00 430.00 275.00 430.00 962.50 107.50 0.00 107.50 0.00 107.50 Hours reduced (noncompensable) - Review of file materials regarding Administrative Record 0.125 0.125 185.00 131.00 23.13 16.38 16.38 Rate reduced to 85% USAO 0.125 0.125 450.00 450.00 56.25 56.25 56.25 - Intraoffice communication with D.C. McAndrews regarding IEP Meeting Review of correspondence from colleague regarding transition Preparation of correspondence to 0.375 11/19/15 CEM colleague regarding same 0.000 275.00 275.00 103.13 0.00 0.00 Hours reduced (IEP) Review of correspondence from colleague regarding LRE Preparation of correspondence to 0.125 11/23/15 CEM colleague regarding same 0.125 275.00 275.00 34.38 34.38 34.38 - 11/17/15 AS 11/18/15 JH Review of file materials/Intraoffice communication regarding 11/19/15 DCM implementation issues Intraoffice communication with H.B. Konkler-Goldsmith 11/24/15 CEM regarding appeal N ot es ar d A w A dj us te d ed Fe eC re di te d H Civil Action No. 15 851 (ESH) Fe eC la im ed H ou rs C re di te d R at eC la im ed R at eC re di te d Page 77 of 104 ou rs C la im or m ed W or k Pe rf ls In iti a D at e Attachment to Mem. Op. [ECF No. 30] 0.125 0.125 275.00 275.00 34.38 34.38 34.38 - 0.125 0.125 430.00 430.00 53.75 53.75 53.75 - 0.125 0.125 275.00 275.00 34.38 34.38 34.38 - 0.250 0.250 275.00 275.00 68.75 68.75 68.75 - 0.375 0.375 275.00 275.00 103.13 103.13 103.13 - Intraoffice communication with C. McAndrews Telephone communication with client 0.125 0.125 155.00 116.00 19.38 14.50 14.50 Rate reduced to 75% USAO Review of file materials regarding Wechsler testing Intraoffice communication with H.B. Konkler-Goldsmith regarding IEE Intraoffice communication with 12/14/15 CEM A. Sauer regarding IEE 0.375 0.125 275.00 275.00 103.13 34.38 34.38 Hours reduced (IEE) Intraoffice communication with D.C. McAndrews regarding 12/15/15 CEM compensatory education 0.125 0.125 275.00 275.00 34.38 34.38 34.38 - Review of file materials/Intraoffice communication regarding 12/15/15 DCM settlement 0.250 0.250 450.00 450.00 112.50 112.50 112.50 - Intraoffice communication with A. Sauer regarding client communication Preparation of correspondence to A. Allen-King regarding 0.375 12/16/15 CEM compensatory education 0.375 275.00 275.00 103.13 103.13 103.13 - Review of file materials/Intraoffice communication with C. McAndrews regarding case 11/24/15 HBK status Intraoffice communication with D.C. McAndrews regarding 11/30/15 CEM appeal 12/01/15 CEM Review of Amended Answer Intraoffice communication with D.C. McAndrews regarding 12/02/15 CEM negotiations 12/14/15 AS Telephone communication with client Intraoffice communication with C. McAndrews 0.125 0.125 155.00 116.00 19.38 14.50 14.50 Rate reduced to 75% USAO Telephone communication with A. King regarding settlement Intraoffice communication with D.C. McAndrews regarding same Research regarding reading 12/17/15 CEM instruction 0.375 0.375 275.00 275.00 103.13 103.13 103.13 - Review of file materials/Intraoffice communication regarding settlement Preparation of correspondence to 0.375 12/17/15 DCM client 0.375 450.00 450.00 168.75 168.75 168.75 - 12/16/15 AS Intraoffice communication with H.B. Konkler-Goldsmith 12/18/15 CEM regarding negotiations N ot es ar d A w A dj us te d ed Fe eC re di te d H Civil Action No. 15 851 (ESH) Fe eC la im ed H ou rs C re di te d R at eC la im ed R at eC re di te d Page 78 of 104 ou rs C la im or m ed W or k Pe rf ls In iti a D at e Attachment to Mem. Op. [ECF No. 30] 0.125 0.125 275.00 275.00 34.38 34.38 34.38 - Telephone communications with counsel Intraoffice communication with 0.625 12/18/15 MEG J. Hardy regarding status 0.625 430.00 430.00 268.75 268.75 268.75 - 1.375 1.375 430.00 430.00 591.25 591.25 591.25 0.125 0.125 185.00 131.00 23.13 16.38 16.38 Rate reduced to 85% USAO Telephone communication with A. Allen-King regarding settlement Preparation of correspondence to 0.125 12/28/15 CEM A. Allen-King regarding same 0.125 275.00 275.00 34.38 34.38 34.38 - Preparation of Motion for Judgment Review of transcripts 01/03/16 MEG Review of Exhibits 6.875 6.875 430.00 430.00 2,956.25 2,956.25 2,956.25 - Intraoffice communication with M. Gehring regarding brief 01/04/16 CEM Review of Motion for Extension 0.250 0.250 275.00 275.00 68.75 68.75 68.75 - 8.625 430.00 430.00 3,708.75 3,708.75 3,708.75 - 0.125 450.00 450.00 56.25 56.25 56.25 - 0.625 185.00 131.00 115.63 81.88 81.88 Rate reduced to 85% USAO Review of file materials Intraoffice communication with J. Hardy regarding status 12/21/15 MEG Preparation of records Review of file materials regarding deadline 12/26/15 JH Intraoffice communication with D.C. McAndrews regarding status Intraoffice communication with C. McAndrews regarding same and Motion Correspondence with counsel, A. Finkhousen Preparation of Extension Motion papers Preparation of correspondence to counsel Preparation of Motion for Judgment Intraoffice communication with 8.625 01/04/16 MEG J. Hardy regarding filing Preparation of Motion on 01/04/16 DCM Administrative Record 0.125 01/04/16 JH Review of file materials/Intraoffice communication regarding Motion for Extension Preparation of Certificate of Service Preparation of correspondence to Judge Huvelle 0.625 Telephone communication with counsel, A. Finkhousen Review of Court Order Preparation of Motion for 01/05/16 MEG Judgment 01/06/16 CEM 01/06/16 MEG 01/06/16 JH 01/07/16 CEM 01/07/16 MEG 01/08/16 DCM Telephone communication with counsel, A. Allen-King, regarding resolution Review of file materials regarding same Preparation of Motion for Judgment Review of file materials regarding deadlines Preparation of correspondence to counsel Update case status Review of correspondence from client N ot es ar d A w A dj us te d ed Fe eC re di te d H Civil Action No. 15 851 (ESH) Fe eC la im ed H ou rs C re di te d R at eC la im ed R at eC re di te d Page 79 of 104 ou rs C la im or m ed W or k Pe rf ls In iti a D at e Attachment to Mem. Op. [ECF No. 30] 6.375 6.375 430.00 430.00 2,741.25 2,741.25 2,741.25 - 0.250 0.250 275.00 275.00 68.75 68.75 68.75 - 7.750 7.750 430.00 430.00 3,332.50 3,332.50 3,332.50 0.125 0.125 185.00 131.00 23.13 16.38 16.38 Rate reduced to 85% USAO 0.250 0.125 0.250 0.125 275.00 430.00 275.00 430.00 68.75 53.75 68.75 53.75 68.75 53.75 - 0.125 0.125 450.00 450.00 56.25 56.25 56.25 - Review of correspondence from A. McLaughlin regarding reimbursement Preparation of correspondences to A. McLaughlin regarding same Intraoffice communication with E. Gilmore regarding reimbursement Telephone communication with A. Anokye regarding compensatory education Preparation of correspondence to A. Anokye regarding same Telephone communication with client regarding settlement and IEP Meeting Intraoffice communication with D.C. McAndrews, M. Gehring and H.B. Konkler-Goldsmith regarding settlement Review of correspondence from counsel, M. Washington, regarding settlement Preparation of correspondence to 01/13/16 CEM counsel regarding same 1.125 Preparation of Motion for 01/13/16 MEG Judgment 2.125 1.125 275.00 275.00 309.38 309.38 309.38 - 2.125 430.00 430.00 913.75 913.75 913.75 - Review of file materials/Intraoffice communication regarding 01/13/16 DCM settlement and status 0.125 450.00 450.00 56.25 56.25 56.25 - 0.125 N ot es ar d A w A dj us te d ed Fe eC re di te d H Civil Action No. 15 851 (ESH) Fe eC la im ed H ou rs C re di te d R at eC la im ed R at eC re di te d Pe k W or Telephone communication with client Intraoffice communication with C. McAndrews Page 80 of 104 ou rs C la im or m ed rf ls In iti a D at e Attachment to Mem. Op. [ECF No. 30] 0.125 0.125 155.00 116.00 19.38 14.50 14.50 Rate reduced to 75% USAO Review of correspondence from counsel, A. Allen-King, regarding settlement Preparation of correspondence to 01/14/16 CEM counsel regarding same 0.125 0.125 275.00 275.00 34.38 34.38 34.38 - Preparation of Motion for Judgment 01/14/16 MEG Review of email to A. Allarking 6.125 6.125 430.00 430.00 2,633.75 2,633.75 2,633.75 - Review of file materials/Intraoffice communication regarding implementation and 01/14/16 DCM compensatory education 01/13/16 AS 0.125 0.125 450.00 450.00 56.25 56.25 56.25 - Review of correspondence from client regarding IEP Review of correspondence from A. Allen-King regarding settlement Intraoffice communication with D.C. McAndrews and M. 01/15/16 CEM Gehring regarding same 0.375 0.375 275.00 275.00 103.13 103.13 103.13 - Preparation of Motion for Judgment Intraoffice communication with D.C. McAndrews and C. 01/15/16 MEG McAndrews regarding status 2.250 2.250 430.00 430.00 967.50 967.50 967.50 01/15/16 JH 0.125 0.125 185.00 131.00 23.13 16.38 16.38 Rate reduced to 85% USAO Review of correspondence from counsel, A. Allen-King Review of file materials/Intraoffice communication regarding 01/16/16 DCM settlement 0.375 0.375 450.00 450.00 168.75 168.75 168.75 - Preparation of Motion for Judgment Intraoffice communication with D.C. McAndrews, H.B. KonklerGoldsmith, C. McAndrews and 01/17/16 MEG M. Connolly regarding Brief 6.250 6.250 430.00 430.00 2,687.50 2,687.50 2,687.50 - 0.125 275.00 275.00 34.38 34.38 34.38 - 0.250 430.00 430.00 107.50 107.50 107.50 - 1.500 430.00 430.00 645.00 645.00 645.00 - Review of emails Intraoffice communication with M. Gehring and D.C. McAndrews regarding 01/18/16 CEM Memorandum of Law 0.125 Intraoffice communication with D.C. McAndrews regarding 01/18/16 MEG Brief 0.250 Review and revise Brief in Support of Motion for Summary 01/18/16 MJC Judgment 1.500 N ot es ar d ed A w A dj us te d H Fe eC re di te d Pe k W or Civil Action No. 15 851 (ESH) Fe eC la im ed H ou rs C re di te d R at eC la im ed R at eC re di te d Page 81 of 104 ou rs C la im or m ed rf ls In iti a D at e Attachment to Mem. Op. [ECF No. 30] Preparation of Memorandum for 01/18/16 DCM District Court 1.000 1.000 450.00 450.00 450.00 450.00 450.00 01/18/16 JH 0.125 0.125 185.00 131.00 23.13 16.38 16.38 Rate reduced to 85% USAO 0.250 0.250 275.00 275.00 68.75 68.75 68.75 - 6.750 6.750 430.00 430.00 2,902.50 2,902.50 2,902.50 - 0.500 0.500 450.00 450.00 225.00 225.00 225.00 - 01/20/16 CEM Review and revise Memorandum 1.000 Preparation of Motion for 01/20/16 MEG Judgment 7.000 01/21/16 CEM Review and revise Brief 1.375 1.000 275.00 275.00 275.00 275.00 275.00 - 7.000 1.375 430.00 275.00 430.00 275.00 3,010.00 378.13 3,010.00 378.13 3,010.00 378.13 - Preparation of Motion for Judgment Intraoffice communication with C. McAndrews regarding status Intraoffice communication with D.C. McAndrews regarding Brief Intraoffice communication with 01/21/16 MEG A. Butler regarding tables 5.750 5.750 430.00 430.00 2,472.50 2,472.50 2,472.50 - 01/21/16 DCM Preparation of memorandum 1.375 1.375 450.00 450.00 618.75 618.75 618.75 01/21/16 AB 1.000 1.000 155.00 116.00 155.00 116.00 116.00 Rate reduced to 75% USAO 5.750 5.750 430.00 430.00 2,472.50 2,472.50 2,472.50 - 1.500 1.500 450.00 450.00 675.00 675.00 675.00 - Review of emails Intraoffice communication with 01/19/16 CEM M. Gehring regarding case law Additional research Review and revise Motion for 01/19/16 MEG Judgment Preparation of Memorandum of 01/19/16 DCM Law Preparation of exhibits Preparation of Motion papers File same Intraoffice communication with D.C. McAndrews regarding 01/22/16 MEG Motion papers Preparation of Memorandum of 01/22/16 DCM Law Review of file materials/Intraoffice communication regarding Motion for Summary Judgment Preparation of correspondence to Judge Huvelle Preparation of Certificate of Service Finalize Motion 01/22/16 JH Review of Exhibits 1.125 Intraoffice communication with D.C. McAndrews regarding 01/25/16 CEM appeal 0.125 1.125 185.00 131.00 208.13 147.38 147.38 Rate reduced to 85% USAO 0.125 275.00 275.00 34.38 34.38 34.38 - Intraoffice communication with H.B. Konkler-Goldsmith 01/27/16 CEM regarding settlement 0.125 275.00 275.00 34.38 34.38 34.38 - 0.125 N ot es ar d ed A w A dj us te d H Fe eC re di te d Pe k W or Civil Action No. 15 851 (ESH) Fe eC la im ed H ou rs C re di te d R at eC la im ed R at eC re di te d Page 82 of 104 ou rs C la im or m ed rf ls In iti a D at e Attachment to Mem. Op. [ECF No. 30] Intraoffice communication with C. McAndrews regarding 01/27/16 HBK settlement 0.125 0.125 430.00 430.00 53.75 53.75 53.75 - Intraoffice communication with H.B. Konkler-Goldsmith regarding settlement 0.125 0.125 155.00 116.00 19.38 14.50 14.50 Rate reduced to 75% USAO 0.125 0.125 430.00 430.00 53.75 53.75 53.75 - Intraoffice communication regarding Case Status - Motion filed, awaiting response 0.250 0.250 430.00 430.00 107.50 107.50 107.50 - 01/27/16 AS Review of file materials/Intraoffice communication regarding 01/28/16 HBK settlement issues 01/28/16 MJC Review of file materials/Intraoffice communication regarding 01/28/16 DCM settlement issues 0.125 0.125 450.00 450.00 56.25 56.25 56.25 - 01/28/16 JH Review of file materials/Intraoffice communication regarding settlement issues 0.125 0.125 185.00 131.00 23.13 16.38 16.38 Rate reduced to 85% USAO 01/29/16 AB Intraoffice communication regarding Motion and Response 0.250 0.250 155.00 116.00 38.75 29.00 29.00 01/29/16 JH Review of emails 0.125 0.125 185.00 131.00 23.13 16.38 16.38 Rate reduced to 75% USAO Rate reduced to 85% USAO Review of file materials regarding evaluations and IEP Intraoffice communication with D.C. McAndrews regarding 01/29/16 CEM same and IEP Meeting 3.875 0.000 275.00 275.00 1,065.63 0.00 0.00 Hours reduced (IEP) Intraoffice communication with D.C. McAndrews and C. 01/29/16 MEG McAndrews regarding IEP 0.125 0.000 430.00 430.00 53.75 0.00 0.00 Hours reduced (IEP) Review of file materials regarding IEP Meeting Telephone communication with 01/31/16 CEM client regarding same 0.250 0.000 275.00 275.00 68.75 0.00 0.00 Hours reduced (IEP) Telephone communication with client Intraoffice communication with C. McAndrews 0.125 0.125 155.00 116.00 19.38 14.50 14.50 Rate reduced to 75% USAO Telephone communication with client Preparation of notes to file Intraoffice communication with H.B. Konkler-Goldsmith regarding Due Process Hearing Intraoffice communication with 02/01/16 CEM A. Sauer regarding IEP Meeting 0.875 0.500 275.00 275.00 240.63 137.50 137.50 Hours reduced (IEP) 02/01/16 AS N ot es ar d A w A dj us te d ed Fe eC re di te d H Civil Action No. 15 851 (ESH) Fe eC la im ed H ou rs C re di te d R at eC la im ed R at eC re di te d Page 83 of 104 ou rs C la im or m ed W or k Pe rf ls In iti a D at e Attachment to Mem. Op. [ECF No. 30] Intraoffice communication with D.C. McAndrews and C. 02/01/16 MEG McAndrews regarding IEP 0.125 0.000 430.00 430.00 53.75 0.00 0.00 Hours reduced (IEP) Intraoffice communication with C. McAndrews Telephone communication with client 0.125 0.125 155.00 116.00 19.38 14.50 14.50 Rate reduced to 75% USAO Intraoffice communication with 02/02/16 CEM A. Sauer regarding IEP Meeting 0.125 0.000 275.00 275.00 34.38 0.00 0.00 Hours reduced (IEP) 0.125 155.00 116.00 19.38 14.50 14.50 Rate reduced to 75% USAO 02/02/16 AS 02/04/16 AS Intraoffice communication with C. McAndrews Telephone communication with client regarding conference call 0.125 Telephone communications with client regarding IEP Meeting Intraoffice communication with M. Acosta and A. Sauer regarding conference call Telephone communication with counsel, A. Finkhousen, 0.625 02/04/16 CEM regarding settlement Review of file materials 02/05/16 CEM regarding IEP Meeting 0.500 0.500 275.00 275.00 171.88 137.50 137.50 Hours reduced (IEP) 0.000 275.00 275.00 137.50 0.00 0.00 Hours reduced (IEP) Preparation of correspondence to client regarding meeting Review of correspondence from client regarding same Telephone communication with client regarding meeting Travel to and attendance at client 1.750 02/06/16 CEM meeting regarding IEP 0.000 275.00 275.00 481.25 0.00 0.00 Hours reduced (IEP) 0.125 0.125 155.00 116.00 19.38 14.50 14.50 Rate reduced to 75% USAO Intraoffice communication with A. Sauer regarding IEP Meeting Preparation of correspondence to counsel Intraoffice communication with D.C. McAndrews regarding IEP 0.750 02/08/16 CEM Meeting 0.000 275.00 275.00 206.25 0.00 0.00 Hours reduced (IEP) 0.125 155.00 116.00 19.38 14.50 14.50 Rate reduced to 75% USAO 02/08/16 AS 02/09/16 AS Telephone communication with client Intraoffice communication with C. McAndrews Telephone communication with client Intraoffice communication with C. McAndrews 0.125 N ot es ar d A w A dj us te d ed Fe eC re di te d H Civil Action No. 15 851 (ESH) Fe eC la im ed H ou rs C re di te d R at eC la im ed R at eC re di te d Page 84 of 104 ou rs C la im or m ed W or k Pe rf ls In iti a D at e Attachment to Mem. Op. [ECF No. 30] Intraoffice communication with D.C. McAndrews regarding settlement Preparation of correspondence to counsel Intraoffice communication with A. Sauer regarding IEP meeting Telephone communication with 0.625 02/09/16 CEM counsel 0.500 275.00 275.00 171.88 137.50 137.50 Hours reduced (IEP) Review of file materials/Intraoffice communication regarding 02/11/16 DCM settlement 0.250 0.250 450.00 450.00 112.50 112.50 112.50 - 0.125 0.125 155.00 116.00 19.38 14.50 14.50 Rate reduced to 75% USAO Intraoffice communication with A. Sauer regarding IEP Meeting, 0.500 02/11/16 CEM exclusion, IEP and field trip 0.000 275.00 275.00 137.50 0.00 0.00 Hours reduced (IEP) Review of correspondences from counsel, A. Finkhousen, regarding settlement Preparation of correspondences to counsel regarding same Intraoffice communication with D.C. McAndrews regarding settlement Telephone communications with 0.750 02/12/16 CEM counsel regarding same 0.750 275.00 275.00 206.25 206.25 206.25 - Review of correspondences from counsel, A. Finkhousen Intraoffice communication with 02/12/16 MEG C. McAndrews regarding same 0.375 0.375 430.00 430.00 161.25 161.25 161.25 - 0.375 450.00 450.00 168.75 168.75 168.75 0.125 185.00 131.00 23.13 16.38 16.38 Rate reduced to 85% USAO 0.00 Hours reduced (IEP); Rate reduced to 75% USAO 02/11/16 AS Telephone communication with client Intraoffice communication with C. McAndrews Review of multiple emails of A. Finkhousen, C. McAndrews Review of file materials/Intraoffice communication regarding 0.375 02/12/16 DCM settlement Review of file materials regarding deadlines 0.125 02/15/16 JH 02/17/16 AS Telephone communication with client regarding IEP Intraoffice communication with C. McAndrews 0.125 0.000 155.00 116.00 19.38 0.00 N ot es ar d A w A dj us te d Fe eC re di te d ed Civil Action No. 15 851 (ESH) Fe eC la im ou rs C la im ed H ou rs C re di te d R at eC la im ed R at eC re di te d Page 85 of 104 H or m ed W or k Pe rf ls In iti a D at e Attachment to Mem. Op. [ECF No. 30] Intraoffice communication with A. Sauer regarding IEP Meeting and field trip Review of correspondence from colleague regarding negotiations Preparation of correspondence to colleague regarding same Research regarding placement Telephone communication with 0.875 02/17/16 CEM regarding mental health 0.125 275.00 275.00 240.63 34.38 34.38 Hours reduced (noncompensable) Telephone communications with client regarding mental health 0.500 02/18/16 CEM and residence 0.000 275.00 275.00 137.50 0.00 0.00 Hours reduced (noncompensable) Review of correspondence from counsel, A. Finkhousen Review of correspondence to counsel 0.375 02/19/16 MEG Update case status 0.375 430.00 430.00 161.25 161.25 161.25 - Review of correspondence from counsel, A. Finkhousen Review of file materials/Intraoffice communication regarding 0.500 02/19/16 DCM settlement 0.500 450.00 450.00 225.00 225.00 225.00 - Review of correspondences from counsel, A. Finkhousen, regarding settlement Intraoffice communication with D.C. McAndrews regarding same Preparation of correspondence to counsel regarding settlement Preparation of correspondence to N. Gregorson regarding compensatory education Review of correspondence from N. Gregorson regarding same Telephone communication with 1.125 02/19/16 CEM client regarding IEP Meeting 1.000 275.00 275.00 309.38 275.00 275.00 Hours reduced (IEP) N ot es ar d A w A dj us te d ed Fe eC re di te d H Correspondence with N. Gregorson regarding compensatory education Intraoffice communication with D.C. McAndrews regarding same Telephone communication with client regarding compensatory education Preparation of correspondence to counsel, A. Finkhousen, regarding same Intraoffice communication with A. Sauer regarding evaluation Intraoffice communication with D.C. McAndrews regarding 0.750 02/22/16 CEM educational needs Civil Action No. 15 851 (ESH) Fe eC la im ed H ou rs C re di te d R at eC la im ed R at eC re di te d Page 86 of 104 ou rs C la im or m ed W or k Pe rf ls In iti a D at e Attachment to Mem. Op. [ECF No. 30] 0.750 275.00 275.00 206.25 206.25 206.25 - 0.125 0.125 450.00 450.00 56.25 56.25 56.25 0.125 0.125 155.00 116.00 19.38 14.50 14.50 Rate reduced to 75% USAO 0.125 0.000 275.00 275.00 34.38 0.00 0.00 Hours reduced (IEP) 0.250 0.000 275.00 275.00 68.75 0.00 0.00 Hours reduced (IEP) Review Brief of DCPS regarding Judgment on Administrative Record 1.000 02/24/16 DCM Review IEP or ER 0.750 450.00 450.00 450.00 337.50 337.50 Hours reduced (IEP) Review of file materials/Intraoffice communication regarding 02/22/16 DCM settlement Intraoffice communication with 02/22/16 AS C. McAndrews Intraoffice communication with 02/23/16 CEM A. Sauer regarding IEP Intraoffice communication with A. Sauer regarding IEP Meeting 02/24/16 CEM and IEP Intraoffice communication with C. McAndrews Telephone communication with client 0.125 0.000 155.00 116.00 19.38 0.00 0.00 Hours reduced (IEP); Rate reduced to 75% USAO 02/26/16 MEG Preparation of Response Brief 0.375 0.375 430.00 430.00 161.25 161.25 161.25 - 02/27/16 MEG Preparation of Response Brief 1.500 1.500 430.00 430.00 645.00 645.00 645.00 - Intraoffice communication with A. Sauer regarding IEP Intraoffice communication with 02/27/16 CEM J. Hardy regarding alerts 0.250 0.000 275.00 275.00 68.75 0.00 0.00 Hours reduced (IEP) 02/29/16 MEG Preparation of Response Brief 6.750 6.750 430.00 430.00 2,902.50 2,902.50 2,902.50 - Intraoffice communication with H.B. Konkler-Goldsmith regarding settlement Review of correspondence from client Intraoffice communication with 0.375 02/29/16 CEM A. Sauer regarding records 0.250 275.00 275.00 103.13 68.75 68.75 Hours reduced (IEP) 02/24/16 AS Telephone communication with client regarding IEP and FBA Intraoffice communication with C. McAndrews N ot es ar d A w A dj us te d ed Fe eC re di te d H Civil Action No. 15 851 (ESH) Fe eC la im ed H ou rs C re di te d R at eC la im ed R at eC re di te d Page 87 of 104 ou rs C la im or m ed W or k Pe rf ls In iti a D at e Attachment to Mem. Op. [ECF No. 30] 0.125 0.000 155.00 116.00 19.38 0.00 0.00 Hours reduced (IEP); Rate reduced to 75% USAO Preparation of Response Brief Intraoffice communication with D.C. McAndrews, M. Connolly, H.B. Konkler-Goldsmith and C. McAndrews regarding Brief Intraoffice communication with 7.625 03/01/16 MEG A. Butler regarding Brief 7.625 430.00 430.00 3,278.75 3,278.75 3,278.75 - 02/29/16 AS Telephone communication with client regarding IEP Intraoffice communication with C. McAndrews regarding same 0.125 0.000 155.00 116.00 19.38 0.00 0.00 Hours reduced (IEP); Rate reduced to 75% USAO Intraoffice communication with C. McAndrews regarding status Review of correspondence from 0.500 03/02/16 MEG counsel, A. Finkhousen 03/02/16 MJC Review and revise Response 1.375 0.500 1.375 430.00 430.00 430.00 430.00 215.00 591.25 215.00 591.25 215.00 591.25 - Intraoffice communication with A. Sauer regarding IEP Meeting and IEP Telephone communication with client regarding same Intraoffice communication with M. Gehring regarding settlement Review of correspondence from counsel, A. Finkhousen, regarding compensatory 0.875 03/02/16 CEM education 0.375 275.00 275.00 240.63 103.13 103.13 Hours reduced (IEP) 03/01/16 AS Intraoffice communication with C. McAndrews Telephone communication with client regarding IEP 0.125 0.000 155.00 116.00 19.38 0.00 0.00 Hours reduced (IEP); Rate reduced to 75% USAO Preparation of Response Brief Intraoffice communication with C. McAndrews and D.C. McAndrews regarding compensatory education and 03/03/16 MEG cases 9.000 9.000 430.00 430.00 3,870.00 3,870.00 3,870.00 - 0.00 Hours reduced (Evaluation); Rate reduced to 75% USAO 03/02/16 AS 03/03/16 AS Telephone communication with client regarding evaluation Intraoffice communication with C. McAndrews regarding same 0.125 0.000 155.00 116.00 19.38 0.00 N ot es ar d A w A dj us te d ed Fe eC re di te d H Intraoffice communication with M. Gehring regarding settlement Intraoffice communication with D.C. McAndrews and M. Gehring regarding appeal and IEE Review of file materials regarding Reply Brief Intraoffice communication with A. Sauer regarding Lindamood Bell and evaluation Review and revise Brief Review of case law regarding Brief Research regarding Lindamood Bell Telephone communication with N. Gregorson resolution same Telephone communication with 4.625 03/03/16 CEM H. Cohen regarding IEE Civil Action No. 15 851 (ESH) Fe eC la im ed H ou rs C re di te d R at eC la im ed R at eC re di te d Page 88 of 104 ou rs C la im or m ed W or k Pe rf ls In iti a D at e Attachment to Mem. Op. [ECF No. 30] 3.500 275.00 275.00 1,271.88 962.50 962.50 Hours reduced (IEE) Preparation of Response Brief 03/03/16 DCM Review of IEP and IEE Review of final response to 03/04/16 MJC Motion for Judgment 1.750 1.380 450.00 450.00 787.50 621.00 621.00 Hours reduced (IEP) 0.375 0.375 430.00 430.00 161.25 161.25 161.25 - Preparation of Response Brief Preparation of materials for 03/04/16 DCM Evaluator 0.750 0.750 450.00 450.00 337.50 337.50 337.50 - Review of emails Intraoffice communication regarding Plaintiffs' Opposition Preparation of Certificate of Service Preparation of correspondence to Judge Huvelle Finalize Plaintiffs' Opposition Review of file materials regarding same 1.250 1.250 185.00 131.00 231.25 163.75 163.75 Rate reduced to 85% USAO 1.375 275.00 275.00 412.50 378.13 378.13 Hours reduced (IEE) 03/04/16 JH Review and revise Brief Intraoffice communication with D.C. McAndrews regarding 03/04/16 CEM same and IEE 1.500 N ot es ar d A w A dj us te d ed Fe eC re di te d H Civil Action No. 15 851 (ESH) Fe eC la im ed H ou rs C re di te d R at eC la im ed R at eC re di te d Page 89 of 104 ou rs C la im or m ed W or k Pe rf ls In iti a D at e Attachment to Mem. Op. [ECF No. 30] Review, revise and finalize Brief Intraoffice communication with J. Hardy regarding filing Intraoffice communication with A. Butler regarding tables Research regarding IEP Intraoffice communication with D.C. McAndrews regarding 03/04/16 MEG Brief 8.375 8.000 430.00 430.00 3,601.25 3,440.00 3,440.00 Hours reduced (IEP) Intraoffice communication with 03/07/16 CEM A. Sauer regarding evaluation 0.000 275.00 275.00 34.38 0.00 0.00 Hours reduced (Evaluation) 0.125 Telephone communication with client regarding evaluation Intraoffice communication with 03/07/16 AS C. McAndrews 0.125 Review of C. McAndrews email 03/08/16 MEG to A. Finkhousen 0.125 Intraoffice communication with C. McAndrews regarding evaluation Telephone communication with client 0.000 155.00 116.00 19.38 0.00 0.00 Hours reduced (Evaluation); Rate reduced to 75% USAO 0.125 430.00 430.00 53.75 53.75 53.75 - 0.125 0.000 155.00 116.00 19.38 0.00 0.00 Hours reduced (Evaluation); Rate reduced to 75% USAO Intraoffice communication with A. Sauer regarding settlement Telephone communications with client regarding paperwork, IEP and evaluation Preparation of correspondence to counsel, A. Finkhousen, regarding settlement and 03/08/16 CEM compensatory education 1.125 0.125 275.00 275.00 309.38 34.38 34.38 Hours reduced (IEP) 03/08/16 AS Review of correspondence from counsel, A. Finkhousen, 03/09/16 DCM regarding settlement 0.125 Intraoffice communication with C. McAndrews regarding IEP 03/09/16 AS and FBA 0.125 0.125 450.00 450.00 56.25 56.25 56.25 0.000 155.00 116.00 19.38 0.00 0.00 Hours reduced (IEP); Rate reduced to 75% USAO Telephone communication with client regarding meeting Meeting with client regarding IEP, evaluations, exclusions and placement Preparation of correspondence to H. Cohen regarding IEE Review of correspondence from Hearing Officer H. Cohen 03/09/16 CEM regarding same 4.125 0.000 275.00 275.00 1,134.38 0.00 0.00 Hours reduced (IEP) 0.000 275.00 275.00 34.38 N ot es ar d A w A dj us te d ed 0.00 Fe eC re di te d H Review of correspondence from School District regarding 0.125 03/10/16 CEM medical referral Civil Action No. 15 851 (ESH) Fe eC la im ed H ou rs C re di te d R at eC la im ed R at eC re di te d Page 90 of 104 ou rs C la im or m ed W or k Pe rf ls In iti a D at e Attachment to Mem. Op. [ECF No. 30] 0.00 Hours reduced (noncompensable) Telephone communication with client regarding evaluation Intraoffice communication with C. McAndrews 0.125 0.000 155.00 116.00 19.38 0.00 0.00 Hours reduced (Evaluation); Rate reduced to 75% USAO Intraoffice communication with 03/15/16 MEG J. Hardy regarding Brief 0.125 0.125 430.00 430.00 53.75 53.75 53.75 - 0.250 0.250 185.00 131.00 46.25 32.75 32.75 Rate reduced to 85% USAO Review of correspondence from N. Gregorson regarding evaluation Preparation of correspondence to N. Gregorson regarding same Intraoffice communication with A. Sauer regarding evaluation Review of correspondence from Lindamood Bell regarding same Intraoffice communication with D.C. McAndrews regarding 0.750 03/15/16 CEM Complaint 0.130 275.00 275.00 206.25 35.75 35.75 Hours reduced (Evaluation) 0.125 0.125 155.00 116.00 19.38 14.50 14.50 Rate reduced to 75% USAO Intraoffice communication with A. Sauer regarding evaluation and records Review of correspondence from Lindamood Bell regarding evaluation Review of correspondence from client regarding behavior and 0.500 03/16/16 CEM speech services 0.000 275.00 275.00 137.50 0.00 0.00 Hours reduced (Evaluation) Intraoffice communication with A. Sauer regarding evaluation Research regarding transportation and discipline Intraoffice communication with J. Hardy regarding Defendant's 03/17/16 CEM Opposition Brief 03/17/16 MEG Review of Reply Brief 0.375 0.250 0.375 0.250 275.00 430.00 275.00 430.00 103.13 107.50 103.13 107.50 103.13 107.50 - Review of file materials regarding School District's Reply 0.125 0.125 185.00 131.00 23.13 16.38 16.38 Rate reduced to 85% USAO 03/14/16 AS 03/15/16 JH 03/16/16 AS 03/17/16 JH Review of file materials regarding Summary Judgment Motion and Department of Revenue check Telephone communication with client Intraoffice communication with C. McAndrews Review of correspondence from client Intraoffice communication with C. McAndrews 0.125 Intraoffice communication with A. Sauer regarding evaluation and behavior Review of file materials regarding transportation and 03/18/16 CEM discipline 0.500 Intraoffice communication with A. Sauer regarding behavior and 03/21/16 CEM evaluation 0.125 N ot es ar d A w A dj us te d Fe eC re di te d ed Civil Action No. 15 851 (ESH) Fe eC la im ed H ou rs C re di te d R at eC la im ed R at eC re di te d H Telephone communication with client regarding IEP Intraoffice communication with 03/17/16 AS C. McAndrews 0.125 Research regarding cases for possible Reply Brief Order Oral 03/18/16 DCM Argument 0.125 03/18/16 AS Page 91 of 104 ou rs C la im or m ed W or k Pe rf ls In iti a D at e Attachment to Mem. Op. [ECF No. 30] 0.000 155.00 116.00 19.38 0.00 0.00 Hours reduced (IEP); Rate reduced to 75% USAO 0.125 450.00 450.00 56.25 56.25 56.25 - 0.125 155.00 116.00 19.38 14.50 14.50 Rate reduced to 75% USAO 0.000 275.00 275.00 137.50 0.00 0.00 Hours reduced (Evaluation) 0.000 275.00 275.00 34.38 0.00 0.00 Hours reduced (Evaluation) Telephone communication with client regarding evaluation Intraoffice communication with C. McAndrews 0.125 0.000 155.00 116.00 19.38 0.00 0.00 Hours reduced (Evaluation); Rate reduced to 75% USAO Intraoffice communication with 03/22/16 CEM A. Sauer regarding evaluation 0.250 0.000 275.00 275.00 68.75 0.00 0.00 Hours reduced (Evaluation) 03/21/16 AS Telephone communication with client regarding evaluation Intraoffice communication with 03/22/16 AS C. McAndrews 0.125 Intraoffice communication with D.C. McAndrews regarding Oral 03/23/16 MEG Argument 0.125 Review of School District Reply Memorandum Research, preparation for possible oral argument Review of file materials/Intraoffice communication regarding use of 03/23/16 DCM compensatory education 0.625 03/23/16 AS Telephone communication with client regarding evaluation Intraoffice communication with C. McAndrews 0.125 0.000 155.00 116.00 19.38 0.00 0.00 Hours reduced (Evaluation); Rate reduced to 75% USAO 0.125 430.00 430.00 53.75 53.75 53.75 - 0.625 450.00 450.00 281.25 281.25 281.25 - 0.00 Hours reduced (Evaluation); Rate reduced to 75% USAO 0.000 155.00 116.00 19.38 0.00 N ot es ar d ed A w A dj us te d H Fe eC re di te d Pe k W or Civil Action No. 15 851 (ESH) Fe eC la im ed H ou rs C re di te d R at eC la im ed R at eC re di te d Page 92 of 104 ou rs C la im or m ed rf ls In iti a D at e Attachment to Mem. Op. [ECF No. 30] Telephone communications with client regarding evaluation Intraoffice communication with A. Sauer regarding same Review of correspondence from H. Cohen regarding IEE Preparation of correspondence to H. Cohen regarding same Intraoffice communication with D.C. McAndrews and M. Gehring regarding Oral Argument and evaluation Research regarding appeal Review of correspondence from 2.000 03/23/16 CEM client regarding evaluation 0.130 275.00 275.00 550.00 35.75 35.75 Hours reduced (IEE) Intraoffice communication with 03/24/16 HBK C. McAndrews regarding status 0.250 430.00 430.00 107.50 107.50 107.50 - Telephone communication with client regarding evaluation Intraoffice communication with C. McAndrews 0.250 0.125 0.000 155.00 131.00 19.38 0.00 0.00 Hours reduced (Evaluation); Rate reduced to 85% USAO Intraoffice communication with H.B. Konkler-Goldsmith regarding referral Intraoffice communication with A. Sauer regarding evaluations and records Review of file materials regarding same, IEP and meetings Telephone communication with Mr. Jones regarding observations Intraoffice communication with M. Gehring and D.C. 1.750 03/24/16 CEM McAndrews regarding appeal 0.130 275.00 275.00 481.25 35.75 35.75 Hours reduced (IEP) Intraoffice communication with C. McAndrews and D.C. 03/24/16 MEG McAndrews regarding status 03/24/16 AS 0.250 0.000 430.00 430.00 107.50 0.00 0.00 Hours reduced (IEP) Preparation of Request for Hearing Preparation of correspondence to 1.250 03/28/16 MEG counsel 1.250 430.00 430.00 537.50 537.50 537.50 03/28/16 JH 0.125 185.00 131.00 23.13 16.38 16.38 Rate reduced to 85% USAO Review of emails 0.125 Review of correspondence from 03/30/16 CEM client regarding evaluation 0.125 Intraoffice communication with D.C. McAndrews regarding 0.125 04/01/16 MEG Motion N ot es ar d A w A dj us te d ed Fe eC re di te d H Intraoffice communication with A. Sauer regarding IEE Preparation of correspondence to H. Cohen regarding same Intraoffice communication with 0.500 03/28/16 CEM M. Gehring regarding Hearing Intraoffice communication with 03/28/16 AS C. McAndrews 0.500 03/30/16 MEG Update case status 0.125 Civil Action No. 15 851 (ESH) Fe eC la im ed H ou rs C re di te d R at eC la im ed R at eC re di te d Page 93 of 104 ou rs C la im or m ed W or k Pe rf ls In iti a D at e Attachment to Mem. Op. [ECF No. 30] 0.130 275.00 275.00 137.50 35.75 35.75 Hours reduced (IEE) 0.000 0.125 155.00 430.00 116.00 430.00 77.50 53.75 0.00 53.75 0.00 53.75 Hours reduced (IEE) - 0.000 275.00 275.00 34.38 0.00 0.00 Hours reduced (Evaluation) 0.125 430.00 430.00 53.75 53.75 53.75 - Preparation of Motion for Oral Argument Review Answer of School 04/01/16 DCM District Review of file materials regarding Motion for Oral Argument 04/01/16 JH 0.625 0.625 450.00 450.00 281.25 281.25 281.25 - 0.125 0.125 185.00 131.00 23.13 16.38 16.38 Rate reduced to 85% USAO Review and edit Motion Intraoffice communication with 04/04/16 CEM M. Connolly regarding Motion 0.375 0.375 275.00 275.00 103.13 103.13 103.13 - 0.125 430.00 430.00 53.75 53.75 53.75 - 0.250 430.00 430.00 107.50 107.50 107.50 - 0.125 275.00 275.00 34.38 34.38 34.38 - 0.750 430.00 430.00 322.50 322.50 322.50 - 0.875 185.00 131.00 161.88 114.63 114.63 Rate reduced to 85% USAO 0.000 450.00 450.00 112.50 0.00 0.00 Hours reduced (noncompensable) 0.00 Hours reduced (Evaluation); Rate reduced to 75% USAO Intraoffice communication with 04/04/16 MEG C. McAndrews regarding Motion 0.125 Review and revise Motion for 04/04/16 MJC Oral Argument 0.250 Intraoffice communication with J. Hardy regarding 0.125 04/05/16 CEM correspondence to Court Intraoffice communication with J. Hardy and E. Gilmore regarding admission Research regarding same Finalize Motion for Oral 04/05/16 MEG Argument 0.750 Review of file materials regarding Motion for Oral Argument Finalize same Preparation of Certificate of Service Preparation of correspondence to Clerk, USDC 0.875 04/05/16 JH Review of correspondence from client regarding implementation 0.250 04/05/16 DCM issues 04/06/16 AS Intraoffice communication with C. McAndrews regarding evaluations 0.250 0.000 155.00 116.00 38.75 0.00 N ot es ar d A w A dj us te d ed Fe eC re di te d H Civil Action No. 15 851 (ESH) Fe eC la im ed H ou rs C re di te d R at eC la im ed R at eC re di te d Page 94 of 104 ou rs C la im or m ed W or k Pe rf ls In iti a D at e Attachment to Mem. Op. [ECF No. 30] Review of correspondence from H. Cohen regarding IEE Preparation of correspondence to 0.125 04/06/16 CEM H. Cohen regarding same 0.000 275.00 275.00 34.38 0.00 0.00 Hours reduced (IEE) Review of correspondences from H. Cohen regarding IEE Intraoffice communication with A. Sauer regarding same Preparation of correspondence to 0.250 04/06/16 CEM H. Cohen regarding IEE 0.000 275.00 275.00 68.75 0.00 0.00 Hours reduced (IEE) Intraoffice communication with H.B. Konkler-Goldsmith regarding Federal Court and 04/07/16 CEM referral 0.125 0.125 275.00 275.00 34.38 34.38 34.38 - Intraoffice communication with C. McAndrews regarding Federal 0.125 04/07/16 HBK Court and referral 0.125 430.00 430.00 53.75 53.75 53.75 - Review of correspondence from 04/10/16 DCM counsel, A. Finkhousen 0.125 0.125 450.00 450.00 56.25 56.25 56.25 - Intraoffice communication with J. Hardy regarding status Review of correspondence from 0.250 04/11/16 MEG counsel, A. Finkhousen 0.250 430.00 430.00 107.50 107.50 107.50 - 0.125 0.125 185.00 131.00 23.13 16.38 16.38 Rate reduced to 85% USAO 0.125 0.125 450.00 450.00 56.25 56.25 56.25 - Review of correspondence from counsel, A. Finkhousen, regarding compensatory education Review of correspondence from H. Cohen regarding IEE Preparation of correspondence to 0.250 04/12/16 CEM H. Cohen regarding same 0.130 275.00 275.00 68.75 35.75 35.75 Hours reduced (IEE) 04/11/16 JH Review of file materials regarding Defendant's Opposition to Motion for Hearing Review of Defendant's 04/12/16 DCM Opposition to Oral Argument Review of Motion in Opposition of Oral Argument Preparation of correspondence to counsel Preparation of correspondence to N. Gregorson regarding compensatory education Intraoffice communication with A. Sauer regarding same Review of correspondence from 04/13/16 CEM counsel 0.500 0.500 275.00 275.00 137.50 137.50 137.50 0.125 0.125 450.00 450.00 56.25 56.25 56.25 - Intraoffice communication with M. Gehring, H.B. KonklerGoldsmith and D.C. McAndrews regarding program and case law Intraoffice communication with A. Sauer regarding evaluation Intraoffice communication with D.C. McAndrews regarding Oral Argument Intraoffice communication with H.B. Konkler-Goldsmith regarding Federal Court and compensatory education Review of correspondence from N. Gregorson regarding evaluation Preparation of correspondence to 04/14/16 CEM N. Gregorson regarding same 0.750 0.750 275.00 275.00 206.25 206.25 206.25 - 04/14/16 DCM Review of recent case law N ot - Review of file materials/Intraoffice communication regarding compensatory education 04/13/16 DCM transportation es ar d A w A dj us te d ed Fe eC re di te d H Civil Action No. 15 851 (ESH) Fe eC la im ed H ou rs C re di te d R at eC la im ed R at eC re di te d Page 95 of 104 ou rs C la im or m ed W or k Pe rf ls In iti a D at e Attachment to Mem. Op. [ECF No. 30] 0.250 0.250 450.00 450.00 112.50 112.50 112.50 - Telephone communication with client Intraoffice communication with C. McAndrews Review of correspondence from counsel 0.250 0.250 155.00 116.00 38.75 29.00 29.00 Rate reduced to 75% USAO Intraoffice communication with C. McAndrews and D.C. McAndrews regarding new matter Review of correspondence from 0.500 04/14/16 MEG counsel, A. Finkhousen 0.000 430.00 430.00 215.00 0.00 0.00 Hours reduced (noncompensable) Intraoffice communication with C. McAndrews regarding Federal Court and compensatory 0.125 04/15/16 HBK education 0.125 430.00 430.00 53.75 53.75 53.75 - 04/14/16 AS 0.875 0.875 430.00 430.00 376.25 376.25 376.25 0.250 450.00 450.00 112.50 112.50 112.50 N ot - Review of correspondence from N. Gregorson regarding use of compensatory education Review of Lindamood Bell 0.250 04/15/16 DCM report es ar d A w A dj us te d ed Fe eC re di te d H Civil Action No. 15 851 (ESH) Fe eC la im ed H ou rs C re di te d R at eC la im ed R at eC re di te d Pe k W or Intraoffice communication with J. Hardy regarding authority Preparation of Notice 04/15/16 MEG Research regarding procedure Page 96 of 104 ou rs C la im or m ed rf ls In iti a D at e Attachment to Mem. Op. [ECF No. 30] - Review of emails Intraoffice communication regarding case law Telephone communication with Judge's chambers Review of file materials regarding Notice of Additional Authority Preparation of correspondence to Judge Huvelli Preparation of Certificate of Service Finalize Notice 1.125 Intraoffice communication with C. McAndrews 0.250 1.125 185.00 131.00 208.13 147.38 147.38 Rate reduced to 85% USAO 0.000 155.00 116.00 38.75 0.00 0.00 Hours reduced (IEE) Review of correspondence from N. Gregorson regarding compensatory education Preparation of correspondence to client regarding same Review of correspondence from H. Cohen regarding IEE Preparation of correspondence to 0.250 04/15/16 CEM H. Cohen regarding same 0.130 275.00 275.00 68.75 35.75 35.75 Hours reduced (IEE) Intraoffice communication with C. McAndrews and J. Hardy regarding status 04/18/16 MEG Review of response 0.375 0.375 430.00 430.00 161.25 161.25 161.25 - Review of correspondence from 04/18/16 DCM J. Fields regarding compliance 0.125 0.125 450.00 450.00 56.25 56.25 56.25 - Review of correspondence from J. Fields regarding compensatory education Intraoffice communication with M. Gehring and J. Hardy regarding same Review of correspondence from 0.250 04/18/16 CEM H. Cohen regarding IEE 0.130 275.00 275.00 68.75 35.75 35.75 04/20/16 JH 0.125 185.00 131.00 23.13 16.38 16.38 Hours reduced (IEE) Rate reduced to 85% USAO 04/15/16 JH 04/15/16 AS Review of emails 0.125 N ot es ar d A w A dj us te d ed Fe eC re di te d H Review of correspondence from H. Cohen regarding IEE Review of independent report Intraoffice communication with D.C. McAndrews regarding 1.000 04/20/16 CEM same and IEE Intraoffice communication with C. McAndrews regarding Federal 0.125 04/21/16 HBK Court Review of email to A. 0.125 04/21/16 MEG Finkhousen Civil Action No. 15 851 (ESH) Fe eC la im ed H ou rs C re di te d R at eC la im ed R at eC re di te d Page 97 of 104 ou rs C la im or m ed W or k Pe rf ls In iti a D at e Attachment to Mem. Op. [ECF No. 30] 0.000 275.00 275.00 275.00 0.00 0.00 Hours reduced (IEE) 0.125 430.00 430.00 53.75 53.75 53.75 - 0.125 430.00 430.00 53.75 53.75 53.75 - 0.125 0.125 185.00 131.00 23.13 16.38 16.38 Rate reduced to 85% USAO Preparation of correspondence to DCPS regarding authorization for compensatory education Intraoffice communication with H.B. Konkler-Goldsmith regarding Federal Court Review of correspondence from A. Anokye regarding compensatory education Preparation of correspondences to counsel, A. Finkhousen, regarding same Intraoffice communication with D.C. McAndrews regarding IEE Preparation of correspondences to H. Cohen regarding same Telephone communication with counsel regarding compensatory education Review of correspondence from counsel regarding same Review of correspondence from 1.250 04/21/16 CEM H. Cohen regarding IEE 0.750 275.00 275.00 343.75 206.25 206.25 Hours reduced (IEE) Review of materials regarding possible IEE Review of correspondences from 0.625 04/21/16 DCM counsel, A. Finkhousen 0.000 450.00 450.00 281.25 0.00 0.00 Hours reduced (IEE) Review of correspondence from 04/22/16 MEG counsel, A. Finkhousen 0.125 0.125 430.00 430.00 53.75 53.75 53.75 - Review of correspondence from 0.125 04/22/16 DCM counsel, A. Finkhousen 0.125 450.00 450.00 56.25 56.25 56.25 - 04/21/16 JH Review of emails regarding compensatory education fund N ot es ar d ed A w A dj us te d H Fe eC re di te d Pe k W or Civil Action No. 15 851 (ESH) Fe eC la im ed H ou rs C re di te d R at eC la im ed R at eC re di te d Page 98 of 104 ou rs C la im or m ed rf ls In iti a D at e Attachment to Mem. Op. [ECF No. 30] Review of correspondence from counsel, A. Finkhousen, regarding compensatory education Telephone communication with H. Cohen regarding IEE Review of file materials 0.375 04/22/16 CEM regarding same 0.125 275.00 275.00 103.13 34.38 34.38 Hours reduced (IEE) Review of correspondence from H. Cohen regarding IEE Preparation of correspondence to 0.125 04/24/16 CEM H. Cohen regarding same 0.000 275.00 275.00 34.38 0.00 0.00 Hours reduced (IEE) Review of file materials/Intraoffice communication regarding use of 0.250 04/25/16 DCM compensatory education 0.250 450.00 450.00 112.50 112.50 112.50 - 0.375 275.00 275.00 378.13 103.13 103.13 Hours reduced (IEE) 0.000 275.00 275.00 34.38 0.00 0.00 Hours reduced (IEE) 0.125 0.000 430.00 430.00 53.75 0.00 0.00 Hours reduced (IEE) Review of correspondences from A. Anokye regarding compensatory education Preparation of correspondences 0.500 04/29/16 CEM to A. Anokye regarding same 0.500 275.00 275.00 137.50 137.50 137.50 - Intraoffice communication with 04/29/16 MEG C. McAndrews regarding status 0.125 0.125 430.00 430.00 53.75 53.75 53.75 - Review of School District's compensatory education plan Review of correspondence from 0.250 04/29/16 DCM counsel, A. Anokye 0.250 450.00 450.00 112.50 112.50 112.50 04/29/16 JH 0.125 0.125 185.00 131.00 23.13 16.38 16.38 Rate reduced to 85% USAO Review of correspondence from N. Gregorson regarding tutoring Preparation of correspondence to 0.125 05/02/16 CEM N. Gregorson regarding same 0.125 275.00 275.00 34.38 34.38 34.38 - Review of file materials regarding IEE Review of DCPS Court materials Telephone communication with H. Cohen regarding IEE Intraoffice communication with D.C. McAndrews regarding 1.375 04/25/16 CEM same Intraoffice communication with H.B. Konkler-Goldsmith 0.125 04/26/16 CEM regarding IEE Intraoffice communication with 04/26/16 HBK C. McAndrews regarding IEE Review of emails N ot es ar d ed A w A dj us te d H Fe eC re di te d Pe k W or Civil Action No. 15 851 (ESH) Fe eC la im ed H ou rs C re di te d R at eC la im ed R at eC re di te d Page 99 of 104 ou rs C la im or m ed rf ls In iti a D at e Attachment to Mem. Op. [ECF No. 30] Preparation of correspondences to A. Anokye regarding compensatory education Review of correspondence from A. Anokye regarding same Intraoffice communication with H.B. Konkler-Goldsmith regarding Federal matter Intraoffice communication with M. Gehring regarding same and compensatory education Review of correspondence from counsel, A. Finkhousen, 05/03/16 CEM regarding Motion 0.750 0.750 275.00 275.00 206.25 206.25 206.25 - Review of correspondence from A. Anokye Intraoffice communication with 05/03/16 MEG C. McAndrews regarding status 0.375 0.375 430.00 430.00 161.25 161.25 161.25 - Review of correspondences from N. Gregerson regarding compliance with compensatory education award and compensatory education supplementation Review of correspondence regarding implementation issues Review of correspondences from counsel, A. Anokye enclosing 05/03/16 DCM Authorization 0.625 0.630 450.00 450.00 281.25 283.50 283.50 05/03/16 JH 0.125 0.125 185.00 131.00 23.13 16.38 16.38 Rate reduced to 85% USAO Intraoffice communication with D.C. McAndrews and M. Gehring regarding compensatory education Preparation of correspondence to 05/04/16 CEM N. Gregorson regarding same 0.250 0.250 275.00 275.00 68.75 68.75 68.75 - Review of correspondence from counsel, A. Finkhousen Intraoffice communication with C. McAndrews and D.C. McAndrews regarding status Preparation of correspondence to 05/04/16 MEG counsel 0.500 0.500 430.00 430.00 215.00 215.00 215.00 - Review of emails N ot es ar d ed A w A dj us te d H Fe eC re di te d Pe k W or Civil Action No. 15 851 (ESH) Fe eC la im ed H ou rs C re di te d R at eC la im ed R at eC re di te d Page 100 of 104 ou rs C la im or m ed rf ls In iti a D at e Attachment to Mem. Op. [ECF No. 30] Review of correspondence from counsel, A. Finkhousen Review of correspondence from N. Gregorson regarding 0.375 05/04/16 DCM compensatory education 0.375 450.00 450.00 168.75 168.75 168.75 05/04/16 JH 0.125 0.125 185.00 131.00 23.13 16.38 16.38 Rate reduced to 85% USAO Intraoffice communication with A. Sauer regarding compensatory education Review of correspondences from N. Gregorson regarding same Preparation of correspondence to N. Gregorson regarding compensatory education Intraoffice communication with M. Gehring and D.C. McAndrews regarding 0.500 05/05/16 CEM Stipulation 0.500 275.00 275.00 137.50 137.50 137.50 - Intraoffice communication with D.C. McAndrews regarding Stipulation Review of Stipulation Preparation of correspondence to counsel, A. Finkhousen Review of correspondence from 0.500 05/05/16 MEG counsel 0.500 430.00 430.00 215.00 215.00 215.00 - Review of correspondence from counsel Review of file materials Intraoffice communication with C. McAndrews Telephone communication with client 0.125 0.125 155.00 116.00 19.38 14.50 14.50 0.125 0.125 0.125 0.125 185.00 430.00 131.00 430.00 23.13 53.75 16.38 53.75 16.38 53.75 Rate reduced to 75% USAO Rate reduced to 85% USAO - 0.125 0.125 155.00 116.00 19.38 14.50 14.50 Rate reduced to 75% USAO Intraoffice communication with A. Sauer regarding compensatory education and summer program Telephone communication with client regarding same Research regarding summer program Telephone communication with H. Cohen regarding IEE Preparation of correspondence to 2.375 05/09/16 CEM H. Cohen regarding same 0.000 275.00 275.00 653.13 0.00 0.00 Hours reduced (IEE) 05/05/16 AS Review of emails 05/05/16 JH Review of emails 05/06/16 MEG Update case status 05/06/16 AS Telephone communication with client Intraoffice communication with C. McAndrews Telephone communication with client Intraoffice communication with C. McAndrews 05/10/16 AS Intraoffice communication with A. Sauer regarding 05/11/16 CEM transportation N ot es ar d A w A dj us te d ed Fe eC re di te d H Civil Action No. 15 851 (ESH) Fe eC la im ed H ou rs C re di te d R at eC la im ed R at eC re di te d Pe k W or Intraoffice communication with A. Sauer regarding 05/10/16 CEM compensatory education Page 101 of 104 ou rs C la im or m ed rf ls In iti a D at e Attachment to Mem. Op. [ECF No. 30] 0.250 0.250 275.00 275.00 68.75 68.75 68.75 - 0.125 0.000 155.00 116.00 19.38 0.00 0.00 Hours reduced (IEE) 0.125 0.125 275.00 275.00 34.38 34.38 34.38 - 05/11/16 AS Telephone communication with client Intraoffice communication with C. McAndrews 0.125 0.125 155.00 116.00 19.38 14.50 14.50 Rate reduced to 75% USAO 05/12/16 AS Telephone communication with client Intraoffice communication with C. McAndrews 0.125 0.125 155.00 116.00 19.38 14.50 14.50 Rate reduced to 75% USAO Intraoffice communication with 05/16/16 CEM L. O'Connell regarding transfer 0.375 0.375 275.00 275.00 103.13 103.13 103.13 05/17/16 JH 0.125 0.125 185.00 131.00 23.13 16.38 16.38 Rate reduced to 85% USAO Review of file materials regarding IEE and Federal Court appeal Intraoffice communication with A. Sauer regarding compensatory education Preparation of correspondence to J. Fields regarding IEE Request Review of correspondence from J. Fields regarding same Intraoffice communication regarding transfer Review of correspondence from 1.625 05/17/16 CEM colleague regarding IEE 0.250 275.00 275.00 446.88 68.75 68.75 Hours reduced (IEE) Intraoffice communication with C. McAndrews regarding status 05/17/16 MEG Review of IEE Request 0.250 0.000 430.00 430.00 107.50 0.00 0.00 Hours reduced (IEE) Review of materials from school psychologist Review of file materials/Intraoffice communication regarding IEE 05/17/16 DCM Request and compliance issues 0.375 0.125 450.00 450.00 168.75 56.25 56.25 Hours reduced (IEE) Intraoffice communication with A. Butler regarding Release Intraoffice communication with 05/18/16 MEG C. McAndrews regarding status 0.250 430.00 430.00 107.50 107.50 107.50 - Review of emails 0.250 0.250 155.00 116.00 38.75 29.00 29.00 05/18/16 JH Review of emails N ot es ar d A w ed 05/18/16 AS Intraoffice communication with D.C. McAndrews and J. Hardy Preparation of correspondence to counsel 0.250 A dj us te d H Fe eC re di te d Pe k W or Civil Action No. 15 851 (ESH) Fe eC la im ed H ou rs C re di te d R at eC la im ed R at eC re di te d Page 102 of 104 ou rs C la im or m ed rf ls In iti a D at e Attachment to Mem. Op. [ECF No. 30] 0.125 0.125 185.00 131.00 23.13 16.38 16.38 Rate reduced to 75% USAO Rate reduced to 85% USAO Intraoffice communication with D.C. McAndrews, A. Sauer and M. Gehring regarding IEE 0.125 05/18/16 CEM Request 0.000 275.00 275.00 34.38 0.00 0.00 Hours reduced (IEE) Review of file materials/Intraoffice communication regarding IEE Request Research recent cases regarding statute of limitations and 0.625 05/18/16 DCM compensatory education 0.250 450.00 450.00 281.25 112.50 112.50 Hours reduced (IEE) 05/19/16 AS Intraoffice communication with D.C. McAndrews and J. Hardy Preparation of correspondence to client 0.250 0.250 155.00 116.00 38.75 29.00 29.00 05/19/16 JH Review of emails 0.250 185.00 131.00 46.25 32.75 32.75 Rate reduced to 75% USAO Rate reduced to 85% USAO 0.250 Review of correspondence from 05/19/16 CEM J. Fields regarding IEE Request 0.125 Update case status Review of correspondence from 0.375 05/19/16 MEG J. Fields 0.000 275.00 275.00 34.38 0.00 0.00 Hours reduced (IEE) 0.125 430.00 430.00 161.25 53.75 53.75 Hours reduced (IEE) Intraoffice communication with D.C. McAndrews, M. Gehring 05/23/16 CEM and J. Hardy regarding Decision 0.125 0.125 275.00 275.00 34.38 34.38 34.38 - Intraoffice communication with A. Sauer regarding status Intraoffice communication with D.C. McAndrews, C. McAndrews, M. Connolly and H.B. Konkler-Goldsmith regarding Decision 05/23/16 MEG Review of Decision Review Opinion and Order of 05/23/16 DCM Court 0.500 0.500 430.00 430.00 215.00 215.00 215.00 - 0.500 0.500 450.00 450.00 225.00 225.00 225.00 - Telephone communication with client Intraoffice communication with D.C. McAndrews, J. Hardy and M. Gehring 0.125 0.125 155.00 116.00 19.38 14.50 14.50 Rate reduced to 75% USAO Intraoffice communication with D.C. McAndrews, M. Gehring 05/24/16 CEM and J. Hardy regarding Decision 0.125 0.000 275.00 275.00 34.38 0.00 0.00 No fee awarded (Postjudgment) 05/23/16 AS N ot es ar d ed A w A dj us te d H Fe eC re di te d Pe k W or Civil Action No. 15 851 (ESH) Fe eC la im ed H ou rs C re di te d R at eC la im ed R at eC re di te d Page 103 of 104 ou rs C la im or m ed rf ls In iti a D at e Attachment to Mem. Op. [ECF No. 30] Intraoffice communication with D.C. McAndrews, H.B. KonklerGoldsmith, M. Connolly, C. McAndrews and J. Hardy regarding status and Fee Petition Research regarding Fee Petition Intraoffice communication with C. McAndrews regarding Decision Intraoffice communication with 05/24/16 MEG T. Baker regarding invoice 1.375 0.000 430.00 430.00 591.25 0.00 0.00 No fee awarded (Postjudgment) Review of file materials/Intraoffice communication regarding 05/24/16 DCM compliance and remand issues 0.125 0.000 450.00 450.00 56.25 0.00 0.00 No fee awarded (Postjudgment) 05/24/16 AS Intraoffice communication with D.C. McAndrews, J. Hardy, M. Gehring, M. Connolly and H.B. Konkler-Goldsmith 0.125 0.000 155.00 116.00 19.38 0.00 0.00 05/24/16 JH Review of emails 0.125 0.000 185.00 131.00 23.13 0.00 0.00 05/25/16 MEG Research regarding Fee Petition 0.375 Review of correspondence from 05/25/16 DCM J. Fields regarding IEE 0.125 0.000 430.00 430.00 161.25 0.00 0.00 0.000 450.00 450.00 56.25 0.00 0.00 0.250 0.000 155.00 116.00 38.75 0.00 0.00 0.125 0.000 155.00 116.00 19.38 0.00 0.00 No fee awarded (Postjudgment) No fee awarded (Postjudgment) 05/25/16 AS 05/26/16 AS Intraoffice communication with D.C. McAndrews and J. Hardy Intraoffice communication with A. Butler No fee awarded (Postjudgment) No fee awarded (Postjudgment) No fee awarded (Postjudgment) No fee awarded (Postjudgment) Intraoffice communication with D.C. McAndrews and A. Sauer regarding compensatory 05/27/16 CEM education Intraoffice communication with C. McAndrews and A. Sauer 05/27/16 MEG regarding status 0.125 0.000 275.00 275.00 34.38 0.00 0.00 No fee awarded (Postjudgment) 0.375 0.000 430.00 430.00 161.25 0.00 0.00 No fee awarded (Postjudgment) 05/27/16 AS Telephone communication with client Intraoffice communication with D.C. McAndrews, J. Hardy, M. Gehring, A. Hagan and H.B. Konkler-Goldsmith 0.250 0.000 155.00 116.00 38.75 0.00 0.00 05/28/16 JH Review of emails 0.125 0.000 185.00 131.00 23.13 0.00 0.00 No fee awarded (Postjudgment) No fee awarded (Postjudgment) N ot es ar d A w A dj us te d ed Fe eC re di te d H Fe eC la im ed H ou rs C re di te d R at eC la im ed R at eC re di te d Pe k W or Research regarding attorneys' fees Preparation of Motion for Attorneys' Fees Intraoffice communication with C. McAndrews regarding status Intraoffice communication with 05/31/16 MEG A. Butler regarding Motion Civil Action No. 15 851 (ESH) ou rs C la im or m ed Page 104 of 104 rf ls In iti a D at e Attachment to Mem. Op. [ECF No. 30] 2.250 0.000 430.00 430.00 967.50 0.00 0.00 No fee awarded (Postjudgment) Preparation of email to J. Fields Review of emails 0.250 0.000 185.00 131.00 46.25 0.00 0.00 No fee awarded (Postjudgment) Review of correspondence to counsel, A. Finkhousen Preparation of Fee Petition papers Intraoffice communication with T. Baker regarding invoice Review of emails between client 06/02/16 MEG and Case Manager 7.500 0.000 430.00 430.00 3,225.00 0.00 0.00 No fee awarded (Postjudgment) Intraoffice communication with M. Connolly regarding Motion Preparation of correspondence to counsel, A. Finkhousen Review of correspondence from counsel Intraoffice communication with D.C. McAndrews and H.B. Konkler-Goldsmith regarding status and invoice Review of correspondence from A. Allen-King Intraoffice communication with T. Baker regarding invoice Preparation of Fee Petition papers 06/03/16 MEG Research regarding Rules 7.875 0.000 430.00 430.00 3,386.25 0.00 0.00 No fee awarded (Postjudgment) 06/01/16 JH Total Total Hours Hours Claimed Credited TOTALS Total Hours * Rate Claimed Total Hours * Rate Credited Total Fees (before reductions) Fee Awarded after 15% reduction for complexity and 5% reduction for block billing 618.000 503.700 212081.51 168473.03 161903.98 $129,523.18
]]>
Some case metadata and case summaries were written with the help of AI, which can produce inaccuracies. You
should read the full case before relying on it for legal research purposes.
This site is protected by reCAPTCHA and the Google
Privacy Policy and
Terms of Service apply.
