Tyco Healthcare Group LP et al v. Ethicon Endo-Surgery Inc

Filing 251

ORDER: Defendant's Objection 247 is SUSTAINED. Defendant is awarded $5,197.50 for the cost of its video depositions. Signed by Judge Janet Bond Arterton on 12/1/15. (Harris, J)

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
DISTRICT OF CONNECTICUT
TYCO HEALTHCARE GROUP, LP and UNITED
STATES SURGICAL CORPORATION,
Civil No. 3:10cv60 (JBA)
Plaintiffs,
v.
December 1, 2015
ETHICON ENDO-SURGERY, Inc.,
Defendant.
RULING ON DEFENDANT’S OBJECTION TO ORDER ON BILL OF COSTS
On March 20, 2015, Defendant Ethicon Endo-Surgery, Inc. (“Ethicon”) submitted
a bill of costs to the Court, seeking $27,813.72 in costs associated with its defense of this
case, including $5,197.50 in videography expenses. In her April 6, 2015 Order on
Defendant’s Bill of Costs [Doc. # 246], the Clerk of the Court denied the claimed
videography costs on the grounds that 28 U.S.C. § 1920(2) “allows fees for printed or
electronically recorded transcripts, not video recordings.” Defendant now moves [Doc.
# 247] for review of the Clerk’s Order, pursuant to Local Rule 54(d). 1 In light of Plaintiffs’
failure to oppose this motion, and for many of the reasons discussed in the Court’s recent
ruling in Weber v. Fujifilm Med. Sys. U.S.A., Inc., No. 3:10CV401 (JBA), 2015 WL
4774466, at *4–5 (D. Conn. Aug. 13, 2015), Defendant’s Objection is SUSTAINED.
Defendant is awarded $5,197.50 for the cost of its video depositions.
IT IS SO ORDERED.
/s/
Janet Bond Arterton, U.S.D.J
Dated at New Haven, Connecticut this 1st day of December, 2015.
Although Ethicon styles its motion as one for reconsideration, it is in fact an objection
seeking “review of the Clerk’s ruling on the bill of costs.” D. Conn. L. Civ. R. 54(d).
1