paid associates, are better performed by the lead counsel to ensure the smooth functioning at trial. Thus, Mr. Francis’s assistance in preparing the trial binder and other trial preparations are reasonable given his position as trial counsel. Regardless, these alleged instances of non-delegation are not frequent enough to mandate reducing the number of hours that will be computed in the lodestar. See Poston, 577 F.Supp. at 920. f.Clerical Work Defendant objects to the clerical nature of certain tasks performed by paralegals Sue Wolsfeld, Patti Sullivan, and Dania Richardson, all of which were billed at a $95.00 hourly rate. Clerical tasks should not be billed at senior associate or paralegal rates. See Missouri v. Jenkins, 491 U.S. 274, 285-88, 109 S.Ct. 2463, 105 L.Ed.2d 229 (1989) (<HOLDING>); see also Halderman v. Pennhurst State Sch. &
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 holding that paralegal fees may be recovered at a market rate but only to the extent that a paralegal performs work that would normally be done by an attorney recognizing that 90 per hour is a reasonable rate for a paralegal holding that purely clerical or secretarial tasks should not be billed at a paralegal rate regardless of who performs them holding that under the filed rate doctrine a question regarding reasonable rates should be addressed to the department of insurance and that the rate plaintiff was charged is conclusively presumed reasonable under the filed rate doctrine