BVS, Inc v. CDW Direct, LLC et al

Filing 211

ORDER granting 208 Motion to Review Clerk's Order; granting 209 Motion to Review Clerk's Order; granting 210 Motion to Review Clerk's Order. The Clerk of Court is directed to assess and tax court costs to CDW Direct, LLC. Signed by Chief Judge Linda R Reade on 4/7/2015. (pac)

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
FOR THE NORTHERN DISTRICT OF IOWA
CEDAR RAPIDS DIVISION
BVS, INC.,
Plaintiff,

No. 11-CV-79-LRR

vs.

ORDER

CDW DIRECT, LLC,
Defendant and Third-Party
Plaintiff,
vs.
ARROW ELECTRONICS, INC.,
TSSLINK, INC. and NETAPP, INC.,
Third-Party Defendants.
____________________
I. INTRODUCTION
The matters before the court are Third-Party Defendant Arrow Electronics, Inc.’s
(“Arrow”) “Motion to Review Clerk’s Order of Bill of Costs” (“Arrow Motion”) (docket
no. 208), Third-Party Defendant TSSLink, Inc.’s (“TSSLink”) “Motion to Review Order
of Bill of Costs” (“TSSLink Motion”) (docket no. 209) and Third-Party Defendant
NetApp, Inc.’s (“NetApp”) “Motion to Review the Clerk’s Order of Bill of Costs”
(“NetApp Motion”) (docket no. 210).
II. RELEVANT PROCEDURAL HISTORY
On February 14, 2015, the court granted the third party defendants’ motions for
summary judgment. See February 14, 2015 Order (docket no. 179). On March 3, 2015,
Arrow (docket no. 193), TSSLink (docket no. 194) and NetApp (docket no. 192) filed bills
of costs. On March 4, 2015, the court entered an Order of Case Settlement (docket no.
195) with respect to Plaintiff BVS, Inc. (“BVS”) and Defendant and Third-Party Plaintiff
CDW Direct, LLC (“CDW”). On March 23, 2015, CDW filed objections to Arrow’s

(docket no. 198), TSSLink’s (docket no. 199) and NetApp’s (docket no. 200) bills of
costs. On March 30, 2015, the Clerk of Court declined to tax any costs to CDW for
Arrow’s (docket no. 203), TSSLink’s (docket no. 204) and NetApp’s (docket no. 202) bills
of costs. Before deciding not to tax any costs, the Clerk of Court determined that the
third-party defendants’ requests for court costs were moot. On April 1, 2015, Arrow filed
the Arrow Motion, TSSLink filed the TSSLink Motion and NetApp filed the NetApp
Motion.
III. ANALYSIS
Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 54(d) states that “[u]nless a federal statute, these
rules, or a court order provides otherwise, costs—other than attorney’s fees—should be
allowed to the prevailing party.” Fed. R. Civ. P. 54(d)(1). A party is a prevailing party
when it “has been awarded some relief by the court.” Buckhannon Bd. & Care Home,
Inc. v. W. Va. Dep’t of Health & Human Res., 532 U.S. 598, 603 (2001).
Here, all third-party defendants have “been awarded some relief by the court,” id.,
by virtue of the court’s order entering judgment in their favor. See February 14, 2015
Order (docket no. 179); Judgment (docket no. 180). Additionally, CDW concedes that all
third-party defendants are prevailing parties as contemplated by Federal Rule of Civil
Procedure 54. See CDW’s Objections to Arrow’s Bill of Costs (docket no. 198) at 2
(“[T]he Third-Party Defendants are the prevailing parties for purposes of Federal Rule of
Civil Procedure 54(d)(1).”); CDW’s Objections to TSSLink’s Bill of Costs (docket no.
199) at 2 (“[T]he Third-Party Defendants are the prevailing parties for purposes of Federal
Rule of Civil Procedure 54(d)(1).); CDW’s Objections to NetApp’s Bill of Costs (docket
no. 200) at 2 (“[T]he Third-Party Defendants are the prevailing parties for purposes of
Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 54(d)(1).”). Although BVS settled with CDW after the
court granted judgment for the third-party defendants, such settlement has no bearing on
the court-costs analysis of the third-party claims. That is, the third-party defendants, as

2

the prevailing parties, are entitled to recover court costs from CDW regardless of BVS and
CDW settling BVS’s claims.
IV. CONCLUSION
In light of the foregoing, Third-Party Defendant Arrow Electronics, Inc.’s “Motion
to Review Clerk’s Order of Bill of Costs” (docket no. 208) is GRANTED, Third Party
Defendant TSSLink, Inc.’s “Motion to Review Order of Bill of Costs” (docket no. 209)
is GRANTED and Third Party Defendant NetApp, Inc.’s “Motion to Review the Clerk’s
Order of Bill of Costs” (docket no. 210) is GRANTED.

The Clerk of Court is

DIRECTED to assess and tax court costs to CDW Direct, LLC in accordance with
Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 54(d)(1) and 28 U.S.C. § 1920.
IT IS SO ORDERED.
DATED this 7th day of April, 2015.

3