Gonzalez v. United States of America

Filing 23

ORDER regarding joint statement for determination of discovery dispute pertaining to deposition fees sought by Plaintff's designated expert Dr. Todd Lempert. Signed by Magistrate Judge William V. Gallo on 4/7/14.(kaj)

1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

9

SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

10
11

LUZ GONZALEZ, et al.,
Plaintiffs,

12
13

v.

14

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,

15

Defendants.

16

)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)

Civil No.13-0861-LAB(WVG)
ORDER REGARDING JOINT
STATEMENT FOR
DETERMINATION OF
DISCOVERY DISPUTE
PERTAINING TO DEPOSITION
FEES SOUGHT BY
PLAINTIFF’S DESIGNATED
EXPERT DR. TODD LEMPERT

17
18

On March 27, 2014, counsel in this case submitted to

19

the Court a Joint Statement For Determination of Discovery

20

Dispute Regarding Deposition Fees Sought By Plaintiff’s

21

Designated Expert In Interventional Radiology, Dr. Todd

22

Lempert

23

Defendant sought a protective order regarding the $800

24

hourly deposition fee sought by Dr. Lempert. Defendant

25

requests that the Court restrict Dr. Lempert’s deposition

26

fee to $750 per hour, the maximum allowed under the

27

guidelines for the United States Attorney’s Office in this

28

district.

(“Joint

Statement”).

1

In

the

Joint

Statement,

13cv0861

1

On April 7, 2014, the Court held an in-chambers

2

hearing on this matter. Defendant was represented by

3

Steven Poliakoff. Plaintiff was represented by Bronislav

4

Dragonov.
Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 26(b)(A) and (E)

5
6

state in pertinent part:
(A) A party may depose any person who has been
identified as an expert whose opinions may be
presented at trial... (E) Unless manifest
injustice would result, the court may require
that the party seeking discovery (i) pay the
expert a reasonable fee for time spent in
responding to discovery under Rule 26(b)(4)(A)
or (D)... (emphasis added).

7
8
9
10
11
12

Here, the guidelines by the Unites States Attorney’s

13

Office and the exhibits and declaration offered by Defen-

14

dant

15

interventional radiologists in this area establish that

16

$750 per hour for deposition testimony is a reasonable

17

hourly rate to compensate an interventional radiologist

18

for a deposition. In fact, at the hearing, Plaintiff

19

agreed that $750 per hour was a reasonable rate for Dr.

20

Lempert’s deposition testimony. Further, Plaintiff has not

21

shown that manifest injustice would result if Defendant

22

did not compensate Dr. Lempert at the hourly deposition

23

rate of $800.

that

support

the

hourly

deposition

rates

for

24

Therefore, for good cause shown, the Court GRANTS

25

Defendant’s Application for a Protective Order. Accord-

26

ingly, the Court ORDERS:

27

Defendant shall reimburse Dr. Lempert at the hourly

28

rate of $750 for his deposition for the entire duration of
2

13cv0861

1

the deposition, as well as court reporter fees for the

2

entire deposition. Plaintiff shall compensate Dr. Lempert

3

for his remaining hourly rate.
IT IS SO ORDERED.

4
5
6

DATED:

April 7, 2014

7
8

Hon. William V. Gallo
U.S. Magistrate Judge

9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28

3

13cv0861