FINDINGS AND RECOMMENDATION THAT DEFENDANTS' MOTION FOR ATTORNEYS' FEES BE GRANTED

BARRY M. KURREN, Magistrate Judge.

Before the Court is Defendants/Counterclaimants Indymac Mortgage Services and ONEWEST Bank, FSB's (collectively, "Defendants") Motion for Attorneys' Fees. (Doc. # 172.) After careful consideration of the motion and the supporting memoranda, the Court FINDS and RECOMMENDS that this motion be GRANTED.1

The background of this case is summarized in the Court's Order Confirming the Foreclosure Sale. (Doc. # 161.) Briefly stated, the Court confirmed the foreclosure sale and found that the Commissioner's fees were reasonable. (Id. at ¶¶ 7, 8.) At the hearing on the Motion for Order Confirming Foreclosure Sale, the Court asked Charles Prather to submit an affidavit regarding attorneys' fees. (Doc. # 152.) The Court subsequently asked that he submit a motion for attorneys' fees. (Doc. # 168.) The instant motion for attorneys' fees followed, and Plaintiffs Dean Krakauer and Robbin Krakauer did not file any opposition to the motion.

"An award of attorneys' fees to a litigant in federal court is improper in the absence of a contract, an applicable statute, a finding that the losing party acted in bad faith, or other exceptional circumstances." Sea-Land Serv., Inc. v. Murrey & Son's Co. Inc., 824 F.2d 740, 744 (9th Cir. 1987). In this case, Defendants are entitled to attorneys' fees pursuant to Sections Nine and Twenty-two of the Mortgage, which allow reasonable attorneys' fees for enforcing the note. (Mem. in Supp. of Mot. Exs. A & B.)

The Court also finds that Defendants' request for attorneys' fees is reasonable. To determine whether a fee award is reasonable, the Court must scrutinize the reasonableness of "(a) the number of hours expended and (b) the hourly fee claimed." Long v. I.R.S., 932 F.2d 1309, 1313-14 (9th Cir. 1991). If those two figures are reasonable, then "there is a `strong presumption' that their product, the lodestar figure, represents a reasonable award." Id. "The court may authorize an upward or downward adjustment from the lodestar figure if certain factors relating to the nature and difficulty of the case overcome this strong presumption and indicate that such an adjustment is necessary."2 Id.

In "determining a reasonable hourly rate, the district court should be guided by the rate prevailing in the community for similar work performed by attorneys of comparable skill, experience, and reputation." Webb v. Ada County, 285 F.3d 829, 840 (9th Cir. 2002) (quoting Chalmers v. City of L.A., 796 F.2d 1205, 1210-11 (9th Cir.1986)). Defendants seek hourly rates of $250 for Charles Prather and Peter Stone, and $85 for their paralegal. (Doc. # 165, Prather Aff. ¶¶ 5, 6, 7.) Based on the Court's familiarity with the prevailing rates in this community, the Court finds that these rates are reasonable.

The Court has also reviewed the number of hours spent on this case, and finds that the 75.4 hours spent are reasonable. Based on the foregoing, and in the absence of any objection by Plaintiffs, the Court concludes that Defendants are entitled to $18,074.50 in attorneys' fees. (Prather Aff. at ¶ 3.)

CONCLUSION

For the foregoing reasons, the Court FINDS and RECOMMENDS that Defendants' Motion for Attorneys' Fees be GRANTED. Defendants are awarded $18,074.50 in attorneys' fees.

IT IS SO FOUND AND RECOMMENDED.