Drye & Warren, LLP in Chicago, Illinois, who testified that Sutherland Asbill’s billing rate for partners, associates, paralegals, and support staff was “respectively quite low,” in comparison to other professionals in Washington, D.C., with similar skills, experience, and reputation for tax matters. 11/9/16 Lavender Deck at ¶¶ 2, 3, 5. In addition, the amount of time spent on this case was appropriate and reasonable. 11/9/16 Lavender Decl. at ¶4. F. The Government’s Supplemental Response. The Government responds to Mr. Lavender’s November 9, 2016 Declaration by arguing that the prevailing market rate in Washington, D.C. is not a “special factor” that would justify an increase in the statutory rate. See Pierce v. Underwood, 487 U.S. 552, 571-72, 108 S.Ct. 2541, 101 L.Ed.2d 490 (1988) (<HOLDING>). Thus, Mr. Lavender’s Declaration that the
holding that the proper rate for prejudgment interest is the rate fixed by the parties in a contract holding that the petitioner can claim no rate as a legal right  other than the filed rate whether fixed or merely accepted by the agency commission holding that nonconsensual oversecured tax claim is entitled to the statutory rate of interest unless the statutory rate constitutes a penalty holding that once a rate is filed with the appropriate agency except for review of the agencys orders the courts can assume no right to a different rate on that ground that in its opinion it is the only or the more reasonable rate holding that with respect to the eaja the local or national market rate for legal services cannot be a special factor used to increase the rate beyond the statutory rate