What is the test for "abuse of discretion" in awarding attorney fees on appeal?

233 [226 Cal.Rptr. 265].)" Ramos v. Countrywide Home Loans, Inc. (2000) 82 Cal.App.4th 615, 621.) "The 'burden is on the party seeking attorney fees to prove that the fees it seeks are reasonable. [Citation.] It is also plaintiffs' burden on appeal to prove that the court abused its discretion in awarding fees.' [Citation.] '"Under the abuse of discretion standard, 'a trial court's ruling will not be disturbed, and reversal of the judgment is not required, unless the trial court exercised its discretion in an arbitrary, capricious, or patently absurd manner that resulted in a manifest miscarriage of justice.' [Citation.]"' [Citation.] '"The abuse of discretion standard is 'deferential,' but it 'is not empty.' [Citation.] '[I]t asks in substance whether the ruling in question "falls outside the bounds of reason" under the applicable law and the relevant facts [citations].' [Citation.]"' (Ibid.) When we are reviewing an award of attorney fees for appellate work, we need not accord the same degree of deference we would give to rulings that involve the trial court's firsthand knowledge. [Citation.] Further, when, as here, the fee order under review was rendered by a judge other than the trial judge, we may exercise '"somewhat more latitude in determining whether there has been an abuse of discretion than would be true in the usual case."' [Citation.]" (Center for Biological Diversity v. County of San Bernardino (2010) 188 Cal.App.4th 603, 615-616.)