Scott v. Palmer et al

Filing 206

ORDER Denying 195 Plaintiff's Motion for Expenses Incurred, signed by Magistrate Judge Sheila K. Oberto on 04/13/15. (Gonzalez, R)

1
2
3
4
5
6
7

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

8

EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

9
10

FLOYD SCOTT,
Plaintiff,

11
12

Case No. 1:09-cv-01329-SKO (PC)
ORDER DENYING PLAINTIFF’S MOTION
FOR EXPENSES INCURRED

v.
(Doc. 195)

13

J. PALMER, et al.,

14

Defendants.
_____________________________________/

15
16

Plaintiff Floyd Scott (“Plaintiff”), a state prisoner proceeding pro se and in forma pauperis,

17 filed this civil rights action pursuant to 42 U.S.C. § 1983 on July 29, 2009. This action for
18 damages is proceeding against Defendants Palmer, Rivera, and Lopez (“Defendants”) on
19 Plaintiff=s claim that while he was at Kern Valley State Prison in Delano, California, Defendant
20 Palmer used excessive physical force against him and Defendants Rivera and Lopez failed to
21 intervene, in violation of his rights under the Eighth Amendment of the United States Constitution.
22

On January 20, 2015, Plaintiff filed a motion seeking reasonable expenses incurred in

23 bringing his motions to compel, which were addressed by the Court in orders filed on November
24 26, 2014. (Doc. 195.) Defendants filed an opposition on February 2, 2015, and Plaintiff filed a
25 reply on February 12, 2015. (Docs. 198, 202.) The motion has been submitted upon the record
26 without oral argument pursuant to Local Rule 230(l).
27

Plaintiff seeks $600.00, which represents four hours of his time invested in preparing the

28 motions to compel, at $150.00 per hour. However, a prevailing litigant is only entitled to seek

1 reimbursement of expenses actually incurred. Fed. R. Civ. P. 37(a)(5). Plaintiff has submitted no
2 evidence that he incurred any actual expenses. Plaintiff did not incur any attorney’s fees because
3 he is not represented by counsel and as a layman, he is not permitted to recoup attorney’s fees for
4 his own time. See Kay v. Ehrler, 499 U.S. 432, 435, 1423 S.Ct. 1435 (1991) (even pro se litigants
5 who are attorneys are not entitled to recover attorney’s fees); Elwood v. Drescher, 456 F.3d 943,
6 946-48 (9th Cir. 2006); Gonzales v. Kangas, 814 F.2d 1411, 1412 (9th Cir. 1987).
Accordingly, Plaintiff’s motion seeking reasonable expenses incurred is HEREBY

7

8 ORDERED DENIED given his failure to submit any evidence he actually incurred expenses.1
9
10

IT IS SO ORDERED.
Dated:

11

April 13, 2015

/s/ Sheila K. Oberto
UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE

12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28

1

Based on Plaintiff’s failure to demonstrate he incurred any expenses, the Court does not reach the issue of whether
Plaintiff would be entitled to expenses under the orders and if so, whether an award would be unjust. Fed. R. Civ. P.
37(a)(5).

2