United States of America, Plaintiff-Appellant/ Cross-Appellee v. Ranger Electronic Communications, Inc., Defendant-Appellee

I concur with the majority’s well-reasoned conclusion that the Hyde Amendment incorporated all the procedures and limitations of the EAJA, including § 2412(d), and that reversal is warranted because Ranger failed to meet those criteria. Nevertheless, I disagree with the majority’s determination that Ranger failed to file its application for a Hyde Award within thirty days of the final judgment. My conclusion instead rests on the fact that Ranger was not an eligible corporation under § 2412(d).

I

Looking closely at the language and history of the Hyde Amendment, I agree with the majority that by…