CHERRONE v. FLORSHEIM DEVELOPMENT, CIV. 2:12-02069 WBS CKD. (2013)
Court: District Court, E.D. California
Number: infdco20130605904
Visitors: 17
Filed: Jun. 04, 2013
Latest Update: Jun. 04, 2013
Summary: ORDER WILLIAM B. SHUBB, District Judge. Judgment was entered in favor of defendants, (Docket No. 30), and defendants submitted a bill of costs for $774.24 in copying fees, (Docket No. 33). Plaintiffs have not objected to the costs pursuant to Eastern District Local Rule 292(c). See Stanley v. Univ. of S. Cal., 178 F.3d 1069 , 1079 (9th Cir. 1999) ("[Federal Rule of Civil Procedure] 54(d) creates a presumption in favor of awarding costs to prevailing parties, and it is incumbent upon the los
Summary: ORDER WILLIAM B. SHUBB, District Judge. Judgment was entered in favor of defendants, (Docket No. 30), and defendants submitted a bill of costs for $774.24 in copying fees, (Docket No. 33). Plaintiffs have not objected to the costs pursuant to Eastern District Local Rule 292(c). See Stanley v. Univ. of S. Cal., 178 F.3d 1069 , 1079 (9th Cir. 1999) ("[Federal Rule of Civil Procedure] 54(d) creates a presumption in favor of awarding costs to prevailing parties, and it is incumbent upon the losi..
More
ORDER
WILLIAM B. SHUBB, District Judge.
Judgment was entered in favor of defendants, (Docket No. 30), and defendants submitted a bill of costs for $774.24 in copying fees, (Docket No. 33). Plaintiffs have not objected to the costs pursuant to Eastern District Local Rule 292(c). See Stanley v. Univ. of S. Cal., 178 F.3d 1069, 1079 (9th Cir. 1999) ("[Federal Rule of Civil Procedure] 54(d) creates a presumption in favor of awarding costs to prevailing parties, and it is incumbent upon the losing party to demonstrate why the costs should not be awarded.")
Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 54(d)(1) and Local Rule 292(f) govern the taxation of costs to losing parties, which are generally subject to limits set under 28 U.S.C. § 1920. See 28 U.S.C. § 1920 (enumerating taxable costs); Fed. R. Civ. P. 54(d)(1) ("Unless a federal statute, these rules, or a court order provides otherwise, costs—other than attorney's fees— should be allowed to the prevailing party."); E.D. Cal. Local R. 292(f). Reviewing the submitted exhibit and considering that courts have awarded copying fees in similar cases, the court finds defendants' bill of costs appropriate under the circumstances. See e.g., Haagen-Dazs Co., Inc. v. Double Rainbow Gourmet Ice Creams, Inc., 920 F.2d 587, 588 (1990).
IT IS THEREFORE ORDERED that costs of $774.24 be taxed against plaintiffs in favor of defendants.
Source: Leagle
