Venice Baking Company v. Sophast Sales and Marketing LLC et al

Filing 43

ORDER GRANTING IN PART AND DENYING IN PART DEFENDANTS MOTION FOR ATTORNEYS FEES 32 by Judge Otis D. Wright, II: The Court will award $41,999.00 in attorneys fees plus the cost of preparing the motion ($3,780.00) for a total of $45,779.00. This amount does not include the proposed cost of the reply, which was avoided by Plaintiffs nonopposition. (lc)

O

1
2
3
4
5
6

United States District Court
Central District of California

7
8
9
10

VENICE BAKING COMPANY,

11
12
13
14
15
16

Case No. 2:16-cv-6136-ODW (KS)

Plaintiff,
v.

ORDER GRANTING IN PART AND

SOPHAST SALES AND MARKETING

DENYING IN PART DEFENDANT’S

LLC, a Maryland Limited Liability

MOTION FOR ATTORNEYS’ FEES

Company; and DOES 1–10, inclusive,

[32]

Defendants.

17
18

On January 26, 2017, the Court entered a judgment in Defendant’s favor. (ECF

19

No. 30.) On February 8, 2017, Defendant filed a motion for attorneys’ fees seeking

20

$41,999 in attorneys’ fees associated with its work prior to the motion, and $7,560 in

21

attorneys’ fees associated with the motion. (ECF No. 32.)

22

On February 16, 2017, Plaintiffs filed a notice of non-opposition to Defendant’s

23

motion for attorneys’ fees in the amount of $41,999. (ECF No. 40.) In that notice of

24

nonopposition, Plaintiff stated that “[b]y not opposing [Defendant’s] fees motion, the

25

award of at least $7,560 sought by [Defendant] associated with preparing a reply brief

26

is not necessary.” (Not. of Nonopposition 1 (emphasis added).) However, Plaintiff

27

appears to have misunderstood Defendant’s motion, which asks for $7,560 in

28

1

attorneys’ fees for preparing the motion and the eventual reply to the motion. (Leff

2

Decl. ¶ 16, ECF No. 32-1.)

3

The fees already incurred in the preparation of the pending motion are $1,050

4

for Attorney Leff (2 hours x $525) and $2,730 for Attorney Russell (7 hours x $390)

5

for a total of $3,780. (Id.) Defendant estimates that fees associated with the reply will

6

also be $3,780.

7

potential $3,780 in attorneys’ fees associated with the reply unrecoverable. However,

8

Defendant is entitled to recover the attorneys’ fees associated with preparing the

9

motion itself. The attorneys’ fees associated with preparing the motion were made

10

necessary by Plaintiff’s alleged failure to stipulate to the proposed attorneys’ fees at

11

the meet and confer.

12

attorneys’ fees at the meet and confer, the fees associated with preparing the motion

13

could have been avoided. Instead, Plaintiff waited until after the motion was filed to

14

voice its acceptance of the proposed attorneys’ fees.

(Id.) The Court agrees that Plaintiff’s nonopposition makes the

(Id. ¶ 18.)

Had Plaintiff merely agreed to the proposed

15

The Court will award $41,999 in attorneys’ fees plus the cost of preparing the

16

motion ($3,780) for a total of $45,779. This amount does not include the proposed

17

cost of the reply, which was avoided by Plaintiff’s nonopposition.

18
19

IT IS SO ORDERED.

20

February 24, 2017

21
22
23

____________________________________
OTIS D. WRIGHT, II
UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE

24
25
26
27
28

2