Haddad, M.D. v. SMG Long Term Disability Plan et al

Filing 45

ORDER signed by William H Orrick, III on 02/08/19 REJECTING 43 Bill of Costs as premature. Once the Ninth Circuit issues the mandate, plaintiff may refile his Bill of Costs in the District Court within 14 days. However, given that the case was r emanded for further proceedings, plaintiff's Bill of Costs should only include costs authorized for the successful appeal under FRAP 39(e) and may not include costs originally incurred in connection with the District Court action. (Benson, A.)

1
2

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

3

EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

4
5

FADI HADDAD,
Plaintiff,

6
7

Case No. 16-cv-01700-WHO
ORDER REJECTING BILL OF COSTS
AS PREMATURE

v.

8

SMG LONG TERM DISABILITY PLAN,
et al.

9

Re: Dkt. No. 43

Defendants.

10

United States District Court
Eastern District of California

11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21

On January 29, 2019, plaintiff filed a Bill of Costs seeking costs incurred on appeal under
Federal Rule of Appellate Procedure 39(e), as well as costs incurred originally in the District
Court. Dkt. No. 43. On February 5, 2019, defendants filed an objection, arguing that the Bill of
Costs is premature until the Court of Appeal files its mandate. Dkt. No. 44.
Plaintiff’s Bill of Costs is REJECTED as premature. Once the Ninth Circuit issues the
mandate, plaintiff may refile his Bill of Costs in the District Court within fourteen days. However,
given that the case was remanded for further proceedings, plaintiff’s Bill of Costs should only
include costs authorized for the successful appeal under FRAP 39(e) and may not include costs
originally incurred in connection with the District Court action.
IT IS SO ORDERED.
Dated: February 8, 2019

22
23
24
25
26
27
28

William H. Orrick
United States District Judge