Amado v. Advanced Call Center Technologies

Filing 54

ORDER, denying the 52 Motion for Relief Awarded Taxation of Costs. Signed by Judge James A Teilborg on 10/9/12.(REW)

1

WO

2
3
4
5
6

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

7

FOR THE DISTRICT OF ARIZONA

8
9

Gisela E. Armado,
Plaintiff,

10
11

vs.

12
Advanced Call Center Technologies,
13
Defendant.
14

)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)

No. CV 10-1630-PHX-JAT
ORDER

15
16

Pending before the Court is Plaintiff’s motion for relief from the taxation of costs.

17

On May 14, 2012, Defendant filed a Bill of Costs. Doc. 50. Plaintiff had 14 days to

18

file objections. Local Rule Civil 54.1(b). Plaintiff did not file any objections. The Clerk of

19

the Court taxed costs on June 4, 2012. Doc. 51. Plaintiff had 7 days to file a motion for

20

review with the District Court. Local Rule Civil 54.1 (b). Plaintiff did not file within 7 days,

21

and by operation of the Local Rule, the taxation judgment became final on June 12, 2012.

22

Plaintiff filed the currently pending motion on July 27, 2012. The Court will deny the

23

motion because it is untimely. Alternatively, the Court denies the motion because the Court

24

does not find a basis for setting aside the taxation judgment for the substantive reasons

25

provided in Defendant’s response (Doc. 53.). Therefore,

26

///

27

///

28

///

1
2
3

IT IS ORDERED that the Motion for Relief Awarded Taxation of Costs (Doc. 52)
is denied.
DATED this 9th day of October, 2012.

4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
-2-