ORDER

LAWRENCE K. KARLTON, Senior District Judge.

Pending before the court is a Motion for Reconsideration of this court's March 27, 2012 Order awarding fees to plaintiffs under the Endangered Species Act. ECF No. 469. The court does not find oral argument to be necessary on this matter, and the matter shall stand submitted on the papers. For the reasons stated below, the Motion for Reconsideration is DENIED.

Defendants' motion for reconsideration is premised on a footnote in the court's March 27, 2012 order, which noted "Plaintiffs do not seek recovery of attorneys fees for their FOIA claims, since the parties reached a settlement on those claims, including attorneys fees. Additionally, plaintiffs do not seek fees for time spent litigating Claim 6, which was bifurcated from the case at bar." March 27, 2012 Order, FN 5. Defendants argue that the court should then have excluded fees totaling $222,018, which defendants assert were connected to FOIA "requests" and litigation against intervenors or amicus.

The court has reviewed the billing statements cited in defendants' motion for reconsideration. All of those statements and defendants' present arguments were taken into consideration at the time of the court's ruling which reduced the lodestar amount by 20%. Accordingly, the Motion for Reconsideration is DENIED.

i. Plaintiffs' Supplemental Fee Request

In their opposition to the Motion for Reconsideration, plaintiffs ask the court to award fees pursuant to a pending Supplemental Motion for Fees, ECF No. 458, which was stayed pending resolution of the primary fee motion. That supplemental motion originally sought $17,052.34 in fees purportedly incurred in opposing a motion for an extension on the deadline for a Biological Opinion and preparing the supplemental fee request. In their reply to defendant's opposition to the supplemental motion for fees, plaintiffs increased the amount to $36,512.65. ECF No. 464. Plaintiffs also seek an additional $9110.70 in fees, which they claim to have incurred in opposing the Motion for Reconsideration. The order staying the Supplemental Motion for Fees held that "all deadlines for filing supplemental motions for attorneys' fees are hereby stayed. Supplemental motions' for attorneys' fees, if any, will be due no later than 28 days after an order on Plaintiffs' motion for attorneys' fees." ECF No. 465. As noted, this court issued an order on plaintiffs' motion for attorneys' fees on March 27, 2012. The deadline for filing for supplemental attorneys' fees was April 24, 2012. Plaintiffs concede that this deadline applies to fees for opposing the instant Motion for Reconsideration. Pls.' Opp'n. to Mot. for Reconsideration at 6, ECF No. 471.

Fed. R. Civ. P. 54 provides "A claim for attorneys fees . . . must be made by motion . . . Unless a statute or a court order provides otherwise, the motion must be filed no later than 14 days after the entry of judgment." As noted, that deadline was extended by this court to April 24, 2012. Plaintiffs did not file a motion for the requested $9110.70 in fees for opposing the Motion for Reconsideration by that deadline. Instead, they made a fee request in in an opposition to a motion filed by defendants. Accordingly, the request is DENIED.

With respect to the already-pending Supplemental Motion for Fees for opposing the motion for an extension of time to file the BiOp, ECF No. 458, the court finds that fees are appropriate. However, the court will consider only the initial $17,052.34 that was properly sought by motion. The court finds even that amount to be unreasonable. Plaintiffs did achieve some degree of success, as the court granted defendants' motion to extend the deadline, but by a substantially shorter period of time than defendants had sought. The opposition to the motion for an extension of time was a six-page brief. The matter was submitted on the papers and no hearing was held.

The court finds that a 90% reduction is warranted, given the relative simplicity of the matter. Accordingly, plaintiffs' supplemental motion is GRANTED in part and DENIED in part. Plaintiffs are awarded $1705 in supplemental fees.

For the foregoing reasons, the court ORDERS as follows:

IT IS SO ORDERED.