104 Order granting attorney's fees .pdf
File information
Original filename: 104 - Order granting attorney's fees.pdf
Title: Microsoft Word - Order GRANTING attorney's fees and sanctions.doc
Author: senglish
This PDF 1.5 document has been generated by PScript5.dll Version 5.2.2 / Acrobat Distiller 10.1.3 (Windows), and has been sent on pdf-archive.com on 17/01/2013 at 05:36, from IP address 68.224.x.x.
The current document download page has been viewed 1192 times.
File size: 23 KB (2 pages).
Privacy: public file
Share on social networks
Link to this file download page
Document preview
Case 2:11-cv-08305-ODW-PLA Document 104
Filed 01/15/13 Page 1 of 2 Page ID #:662
1
O
2
3
4
5
6
7
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
8
CENTRAL DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA
9
10
SLEP-TONE ENTERTAINMENT
CORP.,
11
12
13
v.
Plaintiff,
Case No. 2:11-cv-8305-ODW(PLAx)
ORDER GRANTING MOTION FOR
ATTORNEY’S FEES AND
SANCTIONS [97]
BACKSTAGE BAR AND GRILL, et al.,
Defendants.
14
15
16
Defendants Kelly C. Sugano and Taka-O filed their Motion for Attorney’s Fees
17
and Sanctions on November 27, 2012. (ECF No. 97.) The hearing was set for
18
January 7, 2013. Under the local rules, Plaintiff Slep-Tone Entertainment Corp.’s
19
opposition was due on December 17, 2012. L.R. 7-9. On December 20, 2012, Slep-
20
Tone’s newly hired counsel sought an extension of time to file opposition papers,
21
placing the failure to oppose solely on Slep-Tone’s previous counsel, Donna Boris.
22
(ECF No. 101.) The Court promptly denied that request. (ECF No. 103.)
23
To date, no opposition has been filed. Slep-Tone’s failure to timely oppose
24
Defendants’ Motion may be deemed consent to the granting of the Motion. L.R 7-12;
25
see L.R. 7-9.
26
The Court is empowered to award reasonable attorney’s fees in exceptional
27
cases to the prevailing party. 15 U.S.C. § 1117(a). An exceptional case is one that is
28
either groundless, unreasonable, vexatious, or pursued in bad faith. Cairns v. Franklin
Case 2:11-cv-08305-ODW-PLA Document 104
Filed 01/15/13 Page 2 of 2 Page ID #:663
1
Mint Co., 292 F.3d 1139, 1156 (9th Cir. 2002). Upon consideration of Defendants’
2
motion papers, the Court is convinced that this was nothing more than a shakedown
3
suit. This observation is based not only on evidence presented by Defendants, but
4
also on the Court’s own interaction (or lack thereof) with Slep-Tone. (See e.g., ECF
5
No. 89 (dismissing case with prejudice for Slep-Tone’s failure to prosecute).)
6
Overall, the Court finds that Slep-Tone prosecuted this case to maximize settlement
7
recovery for a minimum amount of work. Ordinarily, such behavior is frowned upon
8
but acceptable.
9
essentially ignored all requests for discovery, explanations of exculpability, and
10
But in this case, Slep-Tone takes trolling to the next level and
requirements to act in good faith. (Mot. 2–6.)
11
Therefore, the Court finds that Slep-Tone’s conduct was both vexatious and in
12
bad faith, and awards Defendants reasonable attorney’s fees in the sum of $18,105.1
13
The Court declines to additionally sanction Slep-Tone at this time.
14
IT IS SO ORDERED.
15
January 15, 2012
16
____________________________________
OTIS D. WRIGHT, II
UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
1
The award of $18,105 includes: $11,525 already billed to the client by J. Marie Gray; $3,780 for
work through November 9, 2012 by Craig McLaughlin; and $2,800 representing the eight hours
expended on this Motion.
2


Link to this page
Permanent link
Use the permanent link to the download page to share your document on Facebook, Twitter, LinkedIn, or directly with a contact by e-Mail, Messenger, Whatsapp, Line..
Short link
Use the short link to share your document on Twitter or by text message (SMS)
HTML Code
Copy the following HTML code to share your document on a Website or Blog