that is unwarranted.”). The “lodestar” is no longer a lodestar in the true sense of the word- — “a star that leads,” Webster’s Third International Dictionary 1329 (1981). Nor do courts use it in the way the term was first used by the Third Circuit — as a base amount that is susceptible of ready adjustment; rather, circuit court deference to the district court’s estimate of a “reasonable” hourly rate is a “lodestar” only in the sense that it is a guiding jurisprudential principle, see Dague, 505 U.S. at 562, 112 S.Ct. 2638 (“The ‘lodestar’ figure has, as its name suggests, become the guiding light of our fee-shifting jurisprudence.”). What the district courts in this circuit produce is in effect not a lodestar as originally conceived, but rather a “presumptively reasonable fee.” See id. (<HOLDING>). The focus of the district courts is no longer
holding that the fee applicant bears the burden of showing that  an adjustment is necessary to the determination of a reasonable fee  holding that the fee applicant bears the burden of  documenting the appropriate hours expended and hourly rates holding that the plaintiff bears the burden of showing that he has standing for each type of relief sought holding that where a contract for legal services fails to expressly provide for the amount of the fee a reasonable fee is implied holding that petitioner had failed to exhaust alternative remedies for review of his fee agreement because the ssa notified petitioner he could obtain his fee by filing a fee petition