J & J Sports Productions Incorporated v. Margaillan et al

Filing 23

ORDER granting in part and denying in part 20 Motion for Attorney Fees. It is Ordered Plaintiff & J Sports is awarded $825.00 in costs and $1,485.00 in attorneys' fees. It if further Ordered the Clerk of Court shall enter an amended judgment in this case. Signed by Judge Cindy K Jorgenson on 1/14/2014.(MFR)

Download PDF
1 WO 2 3 4 5 6 IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 7 FOR THE DISTRICT OF ARIZONA 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 J & J SPORTS PRODUCTIONS, INC., ) ) ) Plaintiff, ) ) vs. ) LUIS HECTOR MARGAILLAN, et al., ) ) ) Defendants. ) No. CIV 13-312-TUC-CKJ ORDER Pending before the Court is Plaintiff’s Motion for Award of Costs and Attorneys’ Fees (Doc. 20). 16 17 18 Procedural Background Plaintiff J & J Sports Productions, Inc., (“J & J Sports”) filed a Complaint in this 19 Court on May 4, 2013. J & J Sports alleged Defendants Luis Hector Margaillan 20 (“Margaillan”) and Lamco Enterprises, LLC (“Lamco”) violated 47 U.S.C. § 605 by their 21 unauthorized publication or use of communications (i.e., the transmission of the Floyd 22 Mayweather, Jr. v. Miguel Cotto, WBA Super World Light Middleweight Championship 23 Fight Program (“the Program”)) for which J & J Sports had the distributing rights. J & J 24 Sports also alleged Margaillan and Lamco violated 47 U.S.C. § 553 by their unauthorized 25 interceptions, reception, publication, divulgence, display, and/or exhibition of the Program. 26 The Clerk of Court entered default on September 11, 2013 (Docs. 11 and 13). On 27 December 18, 2013, this Court granted J & J Sports’ Motion for Default Judgment; Default 28 Judgment was entered. 1 2 J & J Sports requests an award of costs and attorneys’ fees based on the entry of default judgment (Doc. 20). 3 4 Motion for Award of Costs and Attorneys’ Fees (Doc. 20) 5 J & J Sports requests an award of costs and attorneys’ fees based on the entry of 6 default judgment. J & J Sports Court's entry of default judgment, claiming it is the prevailing 7 party for purposes of such an award. (ECF No. 15.) 8 Generally, prevailing parties do not recover attorneys’ fees unless there is some 9 statutory or other exception to the American rule. Middle Mountain Land and Produce Inc. 10 v. Sound Commodities Inc., 307 F.3d 1220, 1225 (9th Cir. 2002) (citing Alyeska Pipeline 11 Serv. Co. v. Wilderness Soc'y, 421 U.S. 240, 257-59 (1975). 47 U.S.C. § 605 provides an 12 exception to the American rule. 13 Under 47 U.S.C. § 605, the Court “shall direct the recovery of full costs, including 14 awarding reasonable attorneys' fees to an aggrieved party who prevails.” 47 U.S.C. § 15 605(e)(3)(B)(iii). A “person aggrieved” includes “any person with proprietary rights in the 16 intercepted communication by wire or radio[,]” 47 U.S.C. § 605(d)(6), or whose rights to a 17 communications service have been violated by unauthorized interception or receipt of the 18 service, 47 U.S.C. § 553(a). See also J & J Sports Prods., Inc. v. Rezdndiz, No. 08 C 4121, 19 2008 WL 5211288, at *2 (N.D.Ill. Dec. 9, 2008) (holding that, under 47 U.S.C. § 553, “it is 20 clearly possible for non-cable operators to be ‘aggrieved’ as a result of unauthorized 21 interception”). 22 “Courts consistently confirm that ‘a party in whose favor judgment is rendered is 23 generally the prevailing party for purposes of awarding costs under Rule 54(d).’” San Diego 24 Police Officers' Ass'n v. San Diego City Employee's Ret. Sys., 568 F.3d 725, 741 (9th Cir. 25 2009). A plaintiff, therefore, who obtains a default judgment may be considered a prevailing 26 party for purposes of awarding fees and costs under § 605. See J & J Sports Prods., Inc. v. 27 Miranda, No. C 09–1037 SI, 2009 WL 3837273 (N.D.Cal. Nov.16, 2009). 28 J & J Sports has prevailed on its claim for violation of 47 U.S.C. § 605 by obtaining -2- 1 a default judgment. J & J Sports is, therefore, entitled to an award of its costs and an award 2 of reasonable attorneys’ fees. J & J Sports seeks $1,500.00 in costs – however, the Bill of 3 Costs submitted by J & J Sports states the costs as $1,450.00. 4 5 J & J Sports’ costs include the filing fee ($400.00), and service-of-process charges ($425.00). The Court finds these costs are allowable by law and necessarily incurred. 6 J & J Sports also lists investigative expenses in the amount of $625.00. J & J Sports 7 seeks this cost pursuant to LRCiv 54.1. The Local Rule lists the items that may be taxed, 8 including “[o]ther items . . . with prior Court approval.” J & J Sports does not assert it 9 “obtained prior court approval to tax its investigator fees or expenses.” J & J Sports 10 Productions, Inc. v. Mosqueda, No. CV–12–00523–PHX–DGC, 2013 WL 5336848 *2 11 (D.Ariz. Sept. 24, 2013). The Court finds this item is not taxable under LRCiv 54.1. 12 Therefore, the Court finds an award of $825.00 for costs is appropriate. 13 J & J Sports also seek an award of $1,935.00 for attorneys’ fees. LRCiv 54.2 sets 14 forth factors that are to be discussed, as appropriate, that “bear[] on the reasonableness of the 15 requested attorneys' fee award[.]” The Court has considered the factors as discussed by 16 counsel, including the time and labor of counsel and his associates. The Motion includes 17 preparation of the Motion for an Award of Costs and Attorneys’ Fees in the request. 18 However, “[i]f the moving party claims entitlement to fees for preparing the motion and 19 memorandum for award of attorneys' fees and related non-taxable expenses, such party also 20 must cite the applicable legal authority supporting such specific request.” LRCiv 54.2(c)(2); 21 see also Moshir v. Automobili Lamborghini America LLC, 927 F.Supp.2d 789, 804 (D.Ariz. 22 2013). No authority having been provided for an award for the preparation of the pending 23 motion, the Court will reduce the requested award by $450.00 (2.75 hours), the amount 24 requested for the preparation of the pending motion. The remaining number of hours 25 expended in this case as set forth in the motion is reasonable. See Doc. 20. Additionally, in 26 light of counsel’s experience and specialized knowledge, the Court finds the charged hourly 27 rates, as set forth in the motion, are reasonable. Id.; Hensley v. Eckerhart, 461 U.S. 424, 433 28 (1983). The Court finds an award of $1,425.00 for attorneys’ fees is appropriate. -3- 1 Accordingly, IT IS ORDERED: 2 1. 3 Plaintiff’s Motion for Award of Costs and Attorneys’ Fees (Doc. 20) is GRANTED IN PART AND DENIED IN PART. 2. Plaintiff J & J Sports is awarded $825.00 in costs and $1,485.00 in attorneys’ 6 3. The Clerk of Court shall enter an amended judgment in this case. 7 4. The Clerk of Court shall mail a copy of this Order to: 4 5 8 9 10 11 12 fees. Luis Hector Margailan 1012 N. G Avenue, Suite 100 Douglas AZ 85607 Lamco Enterprises, LLC 1012 N. G Avenue, Suite 100 Douglas, AZ 85607 DATED this 14th day of January, 2014. 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 -4-

Disclaimer: Justia Dockets & Filings provides public litigation records from the federal appellate and district courts. These filings and docket sheets should not be considered findings of fact or liability, nor do they necessarily reflect the view of Justia.


Why Is My Information Online?