Smith v. Dougherty et al

Filing 64

ORDER granting Defendants' 52 Supplemental Motion for Attorney's Fees, signed by Judge Ricardo S Martinez. (SWT) (cc: Lisa Smith via USPS)

1
2
3
4
5

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
WESTERN DISTRICT OF WASHINGTON

6
7

LISA SMITH,

8
9
10
11

Plaintiff,
v.
WHATCOM COMMUNITY COLLEGE, et
al.,

ORDER GRANTING SUPPLEMENTAL
MOTION FOR ATTORNEY’S FEES

Defendants.

12
13

Case No. C16-1818 RSM

This matter initially came before the Court on Defendants’ motion to compel

14
15
16

Plaintiff’s discovery responses, which included a request for attorney’s fees. Dkt. #48. On
March 26, 2018, the Court granted Defendants’ motion, granted Defendants’ request for

17

attorneys’ fees, and directed Defendants to file a supplemental motion, appending the

18

evidence necessary to support their request. Dkt. #51. Defendants have since filed that

19

supplemental motion. Dkt. #52. Plaintiff has failed to respond to the motion. Defendants

20
21
22
23

now ask the Court for an award of $450 in attorney’s fees. For the reasons discussed below,
the Court GRANTS Defendants’ motion.
As an initial matter, the Court notes that pursuant to this Court’s Local Civil Rules,

24

“[e]xcept for motions for summary judgment, if a party fails to file papers in opposition to a

25

motion, such failure may be considered by the court as an admission that the motion has

26

merit.” LCR 7(b)(2). The Court considers Plaintiff’s failure to respond to be such an
ORDER - 1

1
2
3
4
5
6

admission in this case.
Turning to the fees requested, the Court finds that such fees are warranted. “When it
sets a fee, the district court must first determine the presumptive lodestar figure by
multiplying the number of hours reasonably expended on the litigation by the reasonable
hourly rate.” Intel Corp. v. Terabyte Int’l, Inc., 6 F.3d 614, 622 (9th Cir. 1993). The

7

reasonable hourly rate is determined with reference to the prevailing rates charged by

8

attorneys of comparable skill and experience in the relevant community. See Blum v. Stetson,

9

465 U.S. 886, 895 (1984). In determining the reasonable number of hours expended on the

10
11

litigation, the Court may exclude any excessive, redundant, or otherwise unnecessary hours
billed. Hensley v. Eckerhart, 461 U.S. 424, 434 (1983). The Court may also adjust the

12
13
14

lodestar with reference to factors set forth in Kerr v. Screen Extras Guild, Inc., 526 F.2d 67,
69-70 (9th Cir. 1975). The relevant Kerr factors are: (1) the time and labor required; (2) the

15

novelty and difficulty of the questions; and (3) the skill requisite to perform the legal services

16

properly. “The lodestar amount presumably reflects the novelty and complexity of the issues,

17

the special skill and experience of counsel, the quality of representation, and the results

18
19
20
21
22

obtained from the litigation.” Intel, 6 F.3d at 622.
The Court first examines the hourly rate for time billed by their counsel requested by
Defendants. Defendants seek a billing rate of $150 per hour. Dkt. #53 at ¶ 4. This fee is
reasonable for cases of this nature in this District.

23

The Court now turns to the reasonableness of the hours requested. “The party seeking

24

fees bears the burden of documenting the hours expended in the litigation and must submit

25

evidence supporting” the request. Hensley, 461 U.S. at 433. As noted above, the Court

26
ORDER - 2

1

excludes those hours that are not reasonably expended because they are “excessive,

2

redundant, or otherwise unnecessary.” Hensley, 461 U.S. at 434. Defense counsel spent

3
4
5
6

three hours on the research, writing and filing of the motion to compel. Dkt. #53 at ¶ 5. This
amount of time is reasonable, and the Court will award the fees associated with those hours.
Accordingly, the total amount of attorney’s fees awarded is $450.00.

7

Having considered Defendants’ Supplemental Motion for Fees and Costs, the

8

Declaration in support thereof, and the remainder of the record, the Court hereby finds and

9

ORDERS that Defendants’ motion (Dkt. #52) is GRANTED. Defendants are awarded

10
11

attorneys’ fees in the amount of $450.00.
DATED this 4th day of May 2018.

12

A

13
14

RICARDO S. MARTINEZ
CHIEF UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE

15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
ORDER - 3