Mayfield v. Orozco, et al.

Filing 171

ORDER signed by Magistrate Judge Allison Claire on 12/19/16 ORDERING that the 12/21/16 hearing on 160 Motion for Reasonable Expenses and Sanctions and 161 Motion for Reasonable Expenses is VACATED; the parties shall file simultaneous Supplemental Briefs, addressing the appropriate rate to be applied in this case, within 21 days; the parties may each file a Reply Memorandum 7 days thereafter. (Benson, A)

1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

9

FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

10
11
12

JAMES JOSHUA MAYFIELD, JAMES
ALLISON MAYFIELD, JR., and TERRI
MAYFIELD,

13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20

Plaintiffs,

No. 2:13-cv-02499 JAM AC

ORDER

v.
IVAN OROZCO, SHERIFF
SCOTTJONES, JAMES LEWIS,
RICKPATTISON, COUNTY
OFSACRAMENTO, UNIVERSITY
OFCALIFORNIA
DAVISHEALTHSYSTEM, DR.
GREGORYSOKOLOV, DR. ROBERT
HALS, and Does 1-5,
Defendants.

21
22

Plaintiffs have filed two motions for attorneys fees, one against County defendants and

23

one against UC Davis defendants, both noticed for hearing on December 19, 2016. Having

24

reviewed the moving papers, oppositions and replies, the court notes that the parties have failed to

25

establish the relevant rate in the Eastern District of California or a basis for deviating from that

26

rate as required by Camacho v. Bridgeport Financial, Inc., 523 F.3d 973 (2008), instead

27

addressing only the rates charged by plaintiffs in similar cases without reference to this

28

community’s rates. See also Morgan Hill Concerned Parents Assoc. v. California Dept. of
1

1

Education, 2016 WL 4375015 at 13 (E.D. Cal. Aug. 17, 2016); Lehr v. City of Sacramento, 2013

2

WL 13286549 at *4 (E.D. Cal. April 2, 2013).

3

In light of the foregoing IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that:

4

1. The December 21, 2016 hearing on plaintiff’s Motion for Reasonable Expenses and

5

Sanctions (ECF No. 160) and Motion for Reasonable Expenses (ECF No. 161) is

6

VACATED;

7
8
9
10

2. The parties shall file simultaneous Supplemental Briefs, addressing the appropriate rate to
be applied in this case, within 21 days of this Order;
3. The parties may each file a Reply Memorandum 7 days thereafter.
DATED: December 19, 2016

11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
2