Felman Production, Inc. v. Industrial Risk Insurers

Filing 327

ORDER denying, without prejudice, 321 APPLICATION for Attorney Fees. Signed by Magistrate Judge Mary E. Stanley on 5/6/2010. (cc: attys) (gan)

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF WEST VIRGINIA HUNTINGTON MT. HAWLEY INSURANCE COMPANY, Intervenor Plaintiff, v. FELMAN PRODUCTION, INC., Plaintiff, v. INDUSTRIAL RISK INSURERS, WESTPORT INSURANCE COMPANY, and SWISS REINSURANCE AMERICA CORPORATION, Defendants. Case No. 3:09-cv-00481

ORDER Pending attorneys' before (# the 321). court is Defendants' Felman application has responded for in

fees

Plaintiff

opposition (# 324). fails to comply

The court finds that Defendants' application the principles set forth in Rutherford

with

Controls Int'l Corp. v. Alarm Controls Corp., No. 3:08-cv-369, 2009 WL 4015357 (E.D. Va. Nov. 17, 2009), and Mills v. East Gulf Coal Preparation Co., No. 5:08-cv-260, 2010 WL 1050359 (S.D. W. Va. Mar. 18, 2010), and the court's Order of April 9, 2010 (# 319). Accordingly, it is hereby ORDERED that Defendants' application is denied without prejudice. If Defendants choose to file another application, they should

severely limit their request for fees, keeping in mind that Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 37(a)(5)(C) provides that if a motion to compel is granted in part and denied in part, the court may "apportion the reasonable expenses for the motion." denied significant portions of the motion to compel. The court Defendants

must bear their own costs of reviewing the unresponsive documents which Felman produced to them, as specifically noted in the April 9 Order. It is the court's intention to award reasonable expenses

only for the following activities: Writing and filing the motion to compel (# 197); Reviewing the response to the motion to compel; Writing and filing the reply to the response; Writing and filing the submission re: appropriate remedies and sanctions; Reviewing Felman's submission re: appropriate remedies and sanctions; Preparing for the hearing on the motion to compel (apportioned); Attending and arguing the hearing on the motion to compel (apportioned). Any application for reasonable expenses should comply with Rutherford Controls and Mills and should include a certification that duplicative efforts are not charged. The Clerk is directed to transmit this Order to all counsel of record. ENTER: May 6, 2010

2