Searching over 5,500,000 cases.


searching
Buy This Entire Record For $7.95

Official citation and/or docket number and footnotes (if any) for this case available with purchase.

Learn more about what you receive with purchase of this case.

Jennifer Lukas and Joyce Watters v. United Behavioral Health and Ibm Medical and Dental Employee Welfare

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA


May 25, 2011

JENNIFER LUKAS AND JOYCE WATTERS, PLAINTIFFS,
v.
UNITED BEHAVIORAL HEALTH AND IBM MEDICAL AND DENTAL EMPLOYEE WELFARE BENEFIT PLANS, DEFENDANTS.

ORDER RE: COSTS

On April 15, 2011, the court entered final judgment in this case in favor of defendants. (Docket No. 58.) Defendants submitted a cost bill totaling $727.20, (Docket No. 60), to which plaintiffs have not filed any objections.*fn1

Rule 54(d)(1) of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure and Local Rule 292 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."); Local R. 292(f); Crawford Fitting Co. v. J.T. Gibbons, Inc., 482 U.S. 437, 441 (1987) (limiting taxable costs to those enumerated in § 1920).

The court exercises its discretion in determining whether to allow certain costs. See Amarel v. Connell, 102 F.3d 1494, 1523 (9th Cir. 1996) (holding that the district court has discretion to determine what constitutes a taxable cost within the meaning of § 1920); Alflex Corp. v. Underwriters Labs., Inc., 914 F.2d 175, 177 (9th Cir. 1990) (same). The losing party has the burden of overcoming the presumption in favor of awarding costs to the prevailing party. See Russian River Watershed Prot. Comm. v. City of Santa Rosa, 142 F.3d 1136, 1144 (9th Cir. 1998) (noting that the presumption "may only be overcome by pointing to some impropriety on the part of the prevailing party"); Amarel, 102 F.3d at 1523; see also Local R. 292(d) ("If no objection is iled, the Clerk shall proceed to tax and enter costs.").

Plaintiffs have not filed any objections. After reviewing the bill of costs, the court finds the following costs to be reasonable: Fees of the Clerk: $39.00 Fees for printed or electronically recorded transcripts necessarily obtained for use in the case: $34.20 Fees for exemplification and the costs of making copies of any materials where the copies are necessarily obtained for use in the case: $654.00 Total $727.20

Accordingly, costs of $727.20 will be allowed. IT IS SO ORDERED.


Buy This Entire Record For $7.95

Official citation and/or docket number and footnotes (if any) for this case available with purchase.

Learn more about what you receive with purchase of this case.