Whether a sua sponte stay ordered by the trial court, which directs the Agency to 'repair' the concerns and to 'finish' another review as sought by a plaintiff, who ultimately achieves virtually all of the relief requested without a final judgment or settlement, satisfies EAJA's 'prevailing party' requirement

QUESTION PRESENTED In Buckhannon Bd. and Care Home, Inc. v. W. Va. Dep’t of Health, 532 U.S. 598, 605 (2001), this Court established that one may qualify as a “prevailing party” under the Equal Access to Justice Act (“EAJA”) without securing a final judgment. The Court provided some guidance as to the amount of judicial involvement that would suffice as a requisite “judicial imprimatur,” but defining its scope continues to divide the lower courts. Whether a sua sponte stay ordered by the trial court, which directs the Agency to “repair” the concerns and to “finish” another review as sought by a plaintiff, who ultimately achieves virtually all of the relief requested without a final judgment or _ settlement, satisfies EAJA’s “prevailing party” requirement.