enacted does not appear to be directed to Social Security cases, the legislative history to the EAJA clearly indicates “Congress’ intent that, while the EAJA does not apply to administrative proceedings under the Social Security Act, it does cover civil actions to review social security decisions of the Agency. For example, the House Report accompanying the EAJA states that changes were made:” [t]o exclude administrative proceedings under the Social Security Act. There was much discussion whether the United States should be liable when it is named party and represented in a civil action under the Social Security Act. The Committee decided that civil actions should be covered. Ocasio at 1321 (quoting H.R.Rep. No. 1418 at 4991) See also Kerr v. Heckler, 575 F.Supp. 455 (S.D.Ohio 1983) (<HOLDING>). As noted above, in order to recover attorney
holding that district court lacked jurisdiction over claim for interim social security benefits during pendency of administrative proceedings holding a social security number is not private holding that eaja applies to court proceedings for review of social security cases holding that a social security disability determination is a legal proceeding recognizing the benefit of alternative determinations in the social security review process