Lyons v. State Of Nevada, et al.

Filing 57

ORDER Denying 53 Motion to Review and Deny Defendants' Bill of Costs. Signed by Judge James C. Mahan on 10/28/11. (Copies have been distributed pursuant to the NEF - MMM)

1
2
3
4
5

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
DISTRICT OF NEVADA

6
7
8
9

PHILLIP J. LYONS,

10

Plaintiff,

11

vs.

12

Case No. 2:10-CV-00707-JCM-(LRL)

STATE OF NEVADA ex rel, c/o ORTIZ, et
al.,

ORDER

13
Defendants.
14
15
16
17

Presently before the court is plaintiff Phillip J. Lyons’ pro se motion to review and deny

18

defendants’ bill of costs. (Doc. #53). Defendants filed an opposition. (Doc. #56). Plaintiff argues that

19

he was granted in forma pauperis status in state court and should not be taxed these costs in federal

20

court. (Doc. #53).

21

On August 23, 2011, defendants filed a bill of costs totaling $350, the cost of removing the case

22

from state to federal court. (Doc. #45). The clerk of court entered a clerk’s judgment of $350 on

23

September 15, 2011. (Docs. #50 and #51). Eleven days later, on September 26, 2011, plaintiff filed

24

the instant motion. (Docs. #53).

25

..

26

..

27

..

28

..

1

Pursuant to Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 54(d)(1), the court may review the costs taxed “[o]n

2

motion served within . . . 7 days” of the entry of costs taxed. FED. R. CIV. P. 54(d)(1).1 In the Ninth

3

Circuit, a party waives the right to challenge a cost award if the party fails to object to the costs within

4

the requisite period. Walker v. Cal., 200 F.3d 624, 625-26 (9th Cir. 1999).

5
6

Plaintiff failed to file his objection to the costs within the requisite 7-day period. Thus, plaintiff
has waived his right to challenge the cost award. Walker, 200 F.3d at 625-26.

7

Accordingly,

8

IT IS HEREBY ORDERED, ADJUDGED, AND DECREED that plaintiff Phillip J. Lyons’ pro

9

se motion to review and deny defendants’ bill of costs (doc. #53) be, and the same hereby is, DENIED.

10

DATED October 28, 2011.

11
12

_________________________________
UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE

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

1

Note to subdivision (d) of Rule 54 states that “[t]he provisions as to costs in actions in forma
pauperis contained in [28 U.S.C. § 1915] are unaffected by this rule.” Plaintiff was never
granted in forma pauperis status pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1915, so this note is immaterial for the
instant motion.
-2-