Filed: Jul. 14, 2015
Latest Update: Jul. 14, 2015
Summary: REPORT AND RECOMMENDATION GREGORY J. KELLY , Magistrate Judge . TO THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT: This cause came on for consideration without oral argument on the following motion filed herein: MOTION: DEFENDANT'S MOTION TO QUANTIFY ATTORNEYS' FEE AWARD (Doc. No. 33) FILED: JUNE 10, 2015 _____________________________________________________________ THEREON it is RECOMMENDED that the motion be GRANTED. On May 13, 2015, the Court entered an order granting URS Energy and Construc
Summary: REPORT AND RECOMMENDATION GREGORY J. KELLY , Magistrate Judge . TO THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT: This cause came on for consideration without oral argument on the following motion filed herein: MOTION: DEFENDANT'S MOTION TO QUANTIFY ATTORNEYS' FEE AWARD (Doc. No. 33) FILED: JUNE 10, 2015 _____________________________________________________________ THEREON it is RECOMMENDED that the motion be GRANTED. On May 13, 2015, the Court entered an order granting URS Energy and Construct..
More
REPORT AND RECOMMENDATION
GREGORY J. KELLY, Magistrate Judge.
TO THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT:
This cause came on for consideration without oral argument on the following motion filed herein:
MOTION: DEFENDANT'S MOTION TO QUANTIFY ATTORNEYS'
FEE AWARD (Doc. No. 33)
FILED: JUNE 10, 2015
_____________________________________________________________
THEREON it is RECOMMENDED that the motion be GRANTED.
On May 13, 2015, the Court entered an order granting URS Energy and Construction Inc.'s (the "Defendant") motion to compel (Doc. No. 29) against Alexandra Santos (the "Plaintiff"). Doc. No. 31. In the order, pursuant to Rule 37(a)(5)(A), Federal Rules of Civil Procedure, the Court awarded Defendant its reasonable attorneys' fees incurred in making the motion, and directed Defendant to file a motion to quantify the attorneys' fees if the parties were unable to resolve the issue of quantification. Doc. No. 31 at 2-3. On June 10, 2015, Defendant filed a Motion to Quantify Attorneys' Fee Award (the "Motion"). Doc. No. 33. In the Motion, Defendant requests that the Court enter an order awarding Defendant $874.35 in reasonable attorneys' fees against the Plaintiff. Doc. No. 33 at 3-4.
Defendant attaches a detailed affidavit and a time sheet to the Motion. Doc. No. 33-5 at 1-4, 7, 11. The chart below reflects the individual who performed each task, the requested hourly rate, the time expended, a discount of 10%, and the total amount of attorneys' fees requested:
Attorney Rate Hours Worked Total
Joanne B. Lambert $435.00 0.9 $391.50
Jessica D. Anderson $290.00 2.0 $580.00
Subtotal $971.50
10% Discount -$97.15
TOTAL $874.35
Id. Plaintiff did not file a response to the Motion and, therefore, the Motion is unopposed. See Doc. No. 23 at 5 ("Where no memorandum in opposition has been filed, the Court routinely grants the motion as unopposed.").
The Court has carefully reviewed the hourly rates requested, time expended, and the discount applied in the Motion and finds that it is reasonable. Accordingly, it is RECOMMENDED that the Court:
1. GRANT the Motion (Doc. No. 33); and
2. Enter a separate judgment in favor of Defendant and against Plaintiff in the amount of $874.35.
It is further ORDERED that the Clerk is directed to send a copy of this report and recommendation to Plaintiff by both Certified and Regular U.S. Mail.
A party failing to file written objection to a magistrate judge's findings or recommendations within fourteen (14) days of issuance of the Report and Recommendation, waives the right to challenge on appeal the district court's order based on unobjected-to factual and legal conclusions.
RECOMMENDED.
