Free Objections - District Court of Colorado - Colorado

Case 1:02-cv-02394-RPM

Document 92

Filed 08/19/2008

Page 1 of 4

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE DISTRICT OF COLORADO

Civil Action No. 02-cv-2394-RPM Scott Pivonka, and John Tottleben, individually, Plaintiffs, v.

TFC PUBLICATIONS, INC. a Delaware corporation . Defendant. _______________________________________________ _____________ PLAINTIFFS' OBJECTION TO BILL OF COSTS ____________________________ ____________________________ ____

Plaintiffs' hereby object to Defendant's Bill of Costs, as including charges that are not properly recoverable as costs as allowed by 28 U.S.C. § 1920. This includes the following:

1.

The application for admission of Thomas J. Donovan (Exhibit 1 of the Bill of Costs) to practice before this Court, which is not "necessarily obtained for use in the case," since Mr. Donovan's admission may be used in any appropriate case before this Court.

1

Case 1:02-cv-02394-RPM

Document 92

Filed 08/19/2008

Page 2 of 4

This cost was charged as being $60.00, which should be removed from the Bill of Costs.

2.

The extra copy of each of the depositions. The extra copy is just a convenience for counsel and thus not "necessarily obtained" for use in this case. The original copy may have been used. This cost appears in Exhibits 2A and 2B of the Bill of Costs as "original & one copy" as follows:

ORIGINAL & ONE COPY ­327 PP, SP 1,160.85 ORIGINAL & ONE COPY ­327 PP, JT 1,107.60 ORIGINAL & ONE COPY ­327 PP, RP 1,004.65 Exhibit 2A.

The cost of the original and one copy add up to $3,273.10, and thus the copies necessarily obtained for use in this case must be half, or 1,636.55 at the most. Similarly, Exhibit 2B of the Bill of Costs includes a charge for an "ORIGINAL & ONE COPY ­ 221 PGS" for $784.55, which at most should be $392.28 after discounting for the extra copy. Thus, the deposition costs for these copies should at most be $2,027.83, meaning that the Bill of Costs should be reduced by $2,027.82.

2

Case 1:02-cv-02394-RPM

Document 92

Filed 08/19/2008

Page 3 of 4

3.

The Bill of Costs includes "fees for exemplification" obtained through the "MCS Group, Inc." and attached as Exhibits 3A and 3B to the Bill of Costs. These exhibits do not provide any evidence that these copies were necessarily obtained for use in this case, or for what case. The invoices do not include any indication or proof that what was being copied was necessarily obtained for use in this case. One copy, Exhibit 3A includes "TFH" under "file," but it does not state whether it is for something related a presentation or something necessarily obtained for use in this case. Plaintiffs' submit that these costs must be disallowed as not being propertly supported; meaning that the Bill of Costs should be further reduced by $97.26 (from Exhibit 3A) and $116.84 (from Exhibit 3B), for a further reduction of $214.10.

In total the costs requested that are either "necessarily obtained for use in the case," or improperly supported add up to $2,301.92 and should not be awarded to defendant.

3

Case 1:02-cv-02394-RPM

Document 92

Filed 08/19/2008

Page 4 of 4

WHEREFRE, the Bill of Costs must be reduced by at least $2,301.92, to a total of $2,898.58.

Respectfully submitted on this 19th day of August, 2008, /s/ Ramon L. Pizarro Ramon L. Pizarro Attorney for Plaintiffs 3515 South Tamarac Drive, Suite 200 Denver, CO 80237 (303) 779-9551 [email protected] CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE I hereby certify that on the 19th day of August, 2008, I served the foregoing PLAINTIFFS' OBJECTION TO BILL OF COSTS by e-filing such with the U.S. District Court, who will then copy to the following people at the email addresses listed below: Russell R. Burnside, Esq. Greenberg Dauber Epstein & Tucker [email protected] Daniel Evans, Esq. Godin & Baity, LLP [email protected] Peggy E. Kozal, Esq. [email protected]

/s/ Ramon L. Pizarro

4