Free Objections - District Court of Delaware - Delaware


File Size: 23.2 kB
Pages: 5
Date: May 18, 2008
File Format: PDF
State: Delaware
Category: District Court of Delaware
Author: unknown
Word Count: 2,577 Words, 15,563 Characters
Page Size: Letter (8 1/2" x 11")
URL

https://www.findforms.com/pdf_files/ded/8691/172-4.pdf

Download Objections - District Court of Delaware ( 23.2 kB)


Preview Objections - District Court of Delaware
Case 1:04-cv-01339-SLR

Document 172-4

Filed 05/20/2008

Page 1 of 5

EXHIBIT C Section II.C - Time Entries Demonstrate Arbitrary Allocation of Time
Date Attorney Description Entry Hours 7.0 Hours Claimed 1.0 Hourly Rate $621.00 Total Objections Arbitrary allocation of time and description is too vague to determine if $621.00 allocation is reasonable (§ II.C).

4/18/2007 Sparks PTO; order to compel; preparation

4/25/2007 Sparks Motion to compel; trial prep 5/7/2007 Sparks Motions and trial prep 4/8/2008 Sparks Trial; Lamm deposition and preparation Sparks Total

3.0 2.8 12.8 7.5

1.5 1.0 4.0

$625.00 $625.00 $675.00

Description is too vague to determine if related to the Motions and if hours are reasonable (§ II.A, B); arbitrary allocation of time and $937.50 description is too vague to determine if allocation is reasonable (§ II.C). Arbitrary allocation of time and description is too vague to determine if $625.00 allocation is reasonable (§ II.C). Two hours to prepare for a two hour deposition when trial is in $2,700.00 progress is excessive (§III.B); arbitrary allocation of time (§ II.C). $4,883.50

8/23/2006

Hurd

Document review; prepare for teleconference with opposing counsel; teleconference re discovery and related issues

7.5

2.0

$475.00

Document Review is too vague to determine if related to the Motions (§ II.A) or is work that would have been performed regardless of the discovery dispute (§ III.A); arbitrary allocation of time and description is $950.00 too vague to determine if allocation is reasonable (§ II.C). Descriptions are too vague to determine which, if any, tasks related to the Motions (§ II.A); "Document Review" would have been performed regardless of dispute (§ III.A); arbitrary allocation of time and $950.00 description is too vague to determine if allocation is reasonable (§ II.C). Arbitrary allocation of time and description is too vague to determine if $1,900.00 allocation is reasonable (§ II.C). Arbitrary allocation of time and description is too vague to determine if $1,000.00 allocation is reasonable (§ II.C). $500.00 Arbitrary allocation of time (§ II.C). Description is too vague to determine if related to the Motions (§ II.A); $500.00 arbitrary allocation of time (§ II.C). Arbitrary allocation of time and description is too vague to determine if $1,000.00 allocation is reasonable (§ II.C). Arbitrary allocation of time and description is too vague to determine if $1,000.00 allocation is reasonable (§ II.C). Arbitrary allocation of time and description is too vague to determine if $2,500.00 allocation is reasonable (§ II.C). $200.00 Arbitrary allocation of time (§ II.C).

10/11/2006

Hurd

11/10/2006

Hurd

1/17/2007 1/28/2007 2/12/2007 3/9/2007 3/23/2007

Hurd Hurd Hurd Hurd Hurd

Document review; chronology; outline re open discovery issues Review privilege logs; review and revise correspondence; emails re scheduling and other issues Document review for expert; conferences with AGS; review record; draft and revise motion to compel Review and revise motion to compel; transcript review teleconferences re discovery issues Expert witness issues; review and revise draft reply on motion to compel Review and revise motion to supplement record; expert report; deposition review Pretrial preparation; response to motion for clarification or order granting motion to compel etc Review order; teleconference with client; emails re motion

7.0

2.0

$475.00

7.8

4.0

$475.00

6.5 1.5 3.8 3.5 5.5

2.0 1.0 1.0 2.0 2.0

$500.00 $500.00 $500.00 $500.00 $500.00

4/25/2007 5/15/2007

Hurd Hurd

9.4 0.8

5.0 0.4

$500.00 $500.00

264924

1 of 5

Case 1:04-cv-01339-SLR

Document 172-4

Filed 05/20/2008

Page 2 of 5

EXHIBIT C Section II.C - Time Entries Demonstrate Arbitrary Allocation of Time
Date Attorney Description Entry Hours Hours Claimed Hourly Rate Total Objections

5/16/2007

Hurd

Teleconferences; emails re scheduling issues; document review Document review; teleconference re scheduling; email to court re same

2.5

1.0

$500.00

5/23/2007

Hurd

1.3

1.0

$500.00

4/13/2008 Hurd Total

Hurd

Trial preparation; Arenson deposition

14.0

4.0 27.4

$525.00

Descriptions are too vague to determine if related to the Motions and if hours are reasonable (§ II.A, B); arbitrary allocation of time and $500.00 description is too vague to determine if allocation is reasonable (§ II.C). "Document.." would have been performed regardless of dispute (§ III.A); Arbitrary allocation of time and description is too vague to $500.00 determine if allocation is reasonable (§ II.A-C). Hours are excessive because same attorney charged 3.5 hours on same day; further this entry demonstrates arbitrary allocation of time (§ $2,100.00 II.C) $ 13,600.00 Description is too vague to determine if related to the Motions (§ II.A); $182.00 Arbitrary allocation of time (§ II.C). Description is too vague to determine which, if any, tasks related to the Motions (§ II.A); arbitrary allocation of time and description is too $950.00 vague to determine if allocation is reasonable (§ II.C). Descriptions are too vague to determine if related to the Motions (§II.A); "Review..." would have been performed regardless of discovery dispute (III.A); unlikely letter related to the Motions because letters from Plaintiffs dated 10/16, 10/17 and 10/18/06 were unrelated to the discovery issues raised in the Motions (§ III.A); arbitrary allocation of time and description is too vague to determine if allocation is $520.00 reasonable (§ II.C). Descriptions are too vague to determine if related to the Motions (§ II.A); unlikely letter is related to the Motions because letters from Plaintiffs dated 10/16, 10/17 and 10/18/06 were unrelated to the Motions (§ III.A); arbitrary allocation of time and description is too $260.00 vague to determine if allocation is reasonable (§ II.C). $260.00 Arbitrary allocation of time (§ II.C). $1,040.00 Arbitrary allocation of time (§ II.C).

8/24/2006

Hirzel

Meet and confer re: follow up letter and prepare for meeting with REDACTED Review GB documents for Hot Docs. Revise Privilege Log. Confer with SMT. L. production.

1.4

0.7

$260.00

10/11/2006

Hirzel

6.5

2.0

$475.00

10/12/2006

Hirzel

Review new L production. Revise privilege log. Send letter to Wood.

6.2

2.0

$260.00

10/13/2006 11/18/2006 11/21/2006

Hirzel Hirzel Hirzel

11/29/2006

Hirzel

11/30/2006

Hirzel

Production issues. Review new ALH Hot Docs. 1st draft of privilege letter. Review logs. Review ALH production. Draft Motion to Compel. Draft Lamm outline. Review new Swiss Re documents. Incorporate Swiss Re documents into chron/Lamm outline. Continue drafting Motion to Compel. Begin Frankel outline. Finish reading Arenson deposition. Incorporate Arenson deposition into Motion to Compel/Lamm outline. Frankel deposition outline. Color code new privilege logs for Motion to Compel. Incorporate new log into Motion to Compel.

1.8 1.5 6.5

1.0 1.0 4.0

$260.00 $260.00 $260.00

9.0

2.0

$260.00

$520.00 Arbitrary allocation of time (§ II.C).

7.5

5.0

$260.00

"Finish reading Arenson deposition" is work that would have been performed regardless of the discovery dispute (§ III.A); arbitrary allocation of time and description is too vague to determine if allocation $1,300.00 is reasonable (§ II.C).

264924

2 of 5

Case 1:04-cv-01339-SLR

Document 172-4

Filed 05/20/2008

Page 3 of 5

EXHIBIT C Section II.C - Time Entries Demonstrate Arbitrary Allocation of Time
Date Attorney Entry Description Hours Revise Motion to Compel with new "L" documents and log. Edit Lamm outline with new documents. Dictate chron of new "L" documents. 8.0 Finish dictation of new "L" Hot Docs. Revise Motion to Compel. 6.5 Finalize draft of Motion to Compel. Dictate additional production. Incorporate "L" production into Lamm outline. Review SMH edits to logs. 4.0 Privilege log issues. Review and dictate new documents. 1.8 Lamm deposition. Review motion to compel. Motion to Compel. Jesselson outline. Begin reading Lamm II. Incorporate comments to Motion to Compel. Read Robbins. Jesselson deposition preparation. Finalize edits to Motion to Compel. Take Jesselson's deposition. Finalize Motion to Compel, Order, Compendium and Appendix. Lanius outline. Begin reply brief. Interrogatory responses. Re-review JMP documents. Draft and research reply brief. Stein Hot Docs for preparation. Finalize and file interrogatory response. Edit reply brief. Finalize reply brief, finalize Neuberger outline, prepare for Neuberger deposition, read SMH questions for Lanius Letter to Court with Neuberger; draft motion to supplement; confer with Gil Sparks and Rodger D. Smith; read Lanias [sic] Telephone call with Arbor counsel; revise new documents from Wood; file Motion to Supplement; revise Baker documents Revise PTO, confirm facts in PTO, conference calls re PTO, review privileges re MTC Order, draft letter, revise PTO 5.3 5.8 5.7 6.0 Hours Claimed Hourly Rate Total Objections

12/14/2006 12/15/2006

Hirzel Hirzel

4.0 4.0

$260.00 $260.00

Arbitrary allocation of time and description is too vague to determine if $1,040.00 allocation is reasonable (§ II.C). $1,040.00 Arbitrary allocation of time (§ II.C).

12/19/2006 12/21/2006 1/19/2007 1/24/2007 1/29/2007 1/30/2007

Hirzel Hirzel Hirzel Hirzel Hirzel Hirzel

2.0 1.0 3.0 3.0 2.0 1.0

$260.00 $260.00 $280.00 $280.00 $280.00 $280.00

Arbitrary allocation of time and description is too vague to determine if $520.00 allocation is reasonable (§ II.C). Arbitrary allocation of time and description is too vague to determine if $260.00 allocation is reasonable (§ II.C). Arbitrary allocation of time (§ II.C); allocation is excessive for "Review" $840.00 (§ III.B). Arbitrary allocation of time and description is too vague to determine if $840.00 allocation is reasonable (§ II.C). $560.00 Arbitrary allocation of time (§ II.C). $280.00 Arbitrary allocation of time (§ II.C).

1/31/2007 3/2/2007

Hirzel Hirzel

10.0 10.5

4.0 4.0

$280.00 $280.00

$1,120.00 Arbitrary allocation of time (§ II.C). Arbitrary allocation of time and description is too vague to determine if $1,120.00 allocation is reasonable (§ II.C). Arbitrary allocation of time and description is too vague to determine if $1,400.00 allocation is reasonable (§ II.C). $280.00 Arbitrary allocation of time (§ II.C). Arbitrary allocation of time and description is too vague to determine if $560.00 allocation is reasonable (§ II.C). Arbitrary allocation of time and description is too vague to determine if $840.00 allocation is reasonable (§ II.C). Arbitrary allocation of time and description is too vague to determine if $190.00 allocation is reasonable (§ II.C). Arbitrary allocation of time and description is too vague to determine if $840.00 allocation is reasonable (§ II.C).

3/5/2007 3/7/2007

Hirzel Hirzel

9.9 2.0

5.0 1.0

$280.00 $280.00

3/12/2007

Hirzel

5.8

2.0

$280.00

3/19/2007

Hirzel

4.2

3.0

$280.00

3/22/2007

Hirzel

1.2

0.5

$380.00

4/18/2007

Hirzel

11.1

3.0

$280.00

264924

3 of 5

Case 1:04-cv-01339-SLR

Document 172-4

Filed 05/20/2008

Page 4 of 5

EXHIBIT C Section II.C - Time Entries Demonstrate Arbitrary Allocation of Time
Date Attorney Description Finalize PTO, finish letter to Court re privilege log, review new Weil documents, respond to Boyle e-mail re letters to Court, Research "Affiliate" issues, Motion to Compel follow-up, revise Arbor Outline, draft Capobianco Outline, draft Zyblerberg [sic] Outline, research re: Shield/Sword Draft motion for further relief, trial preparation issues Draft reply on motion for further relief, trial preparation Trial, Lamm deposition Entry Hours Hours Claimed Hourly Rate Total Objections

4/19/2007

Hirzel

8.2

2.0

$280.00

$560.00 Arbitrary allocation of time (§ II.C).

4/25/2007 5/4/2007 5/7/2007 4/8/2008

Hirzel Hirzel Hirzel Hirzel

4.2 9.0 4.0 14.4

2.0 5.0 2.0 4.0

$280.00 $280.00 $280.00 $355.00

Arbitrary allocation of time and description is too vague to determine if $560.00 allocation is reasonable (§ II.C). $1,400.00 Arbitrary allocation of time (§ II.C). $560.00 Arbitrary allocation of time (§ II.C). Arbitrary allocation of time (§ II.C); hours claimed are excessive and $1,420.00 redundant because Mr. Sparks also charged for time (§III.B). Description is too vague to determine if related to Motions and if hours are reasonable (§ II.A, B); work is unrelated to discovery issues raised $1,420.00 in the Motions (§ III.A). $22,682.00 "Document Review" is too vague to determine if related to the Motions (§ II.A) or is work that would have been performed regardless of the discovery dispute (§ III.A); "draft outline..." is too vague to determine if related to the Motions (§ II.A) and could be for work that is unrelated to discovery issues raised in the Motions (§ III.A); arbitrary allocation of time and description is too vague to determine if allocation is $490.00 reasonable (§ II.C). "Document Review" is too vague to determine if related to the Motions (§ II.A) or is work that would have been performed regardless of the discovery dispute (§ III.A); "legal research" description is too vague to determine if related to the Motions and if hours are reasonable (§ II.A, B); arbitrary allocation of time and description is too vague to $490.00 determine if allocation is reasonable (§ II.C). "Document Review" is too vague to determine if related to the Motions (§ II.A) or is work that would have been performed regardless of the discovery dispute (§ III.A); "legal research" description is too vague to determine if related to the Motions and if hours are reasonable (§ II.A, B); arbitrary allocation of time and description is too vague to $490.00 determine if allocation is reasonable (§ II.C).

4/14/2008 Hirzel Total

Hirzel

Trial

13.0

4.0 79.2

$355.00

Document review; draft outline for production 8/16/2006 DiTomo deficiencies.

4.0

2.0

$245.00

Document review; legal research concerning 8/17/2006 DiTomo discovery.

4.0

2.0

$245.00

Document review; legal research concerning 8/18/2006 DiTomo discovery.

3.0

2.0

$245.00

264924

4 of 5

Case 1:04-cv-01339-SLR

Document 172-4

Filed 05/20/2008

Page 5 of 5

EXHIBIT C Section II.C - Time Entries Demonstrate Arbitrary Allocation of Time
Date Attorney Description Entry Hours Hours Claimed Hourly Rate Total Objections "Production Review" is too vague to determine if related to the Motions (§ II.A) or is work that would have been performed regardless of the discovery dispute (§ III.A); "draft outline..." is too vague to determine if related to the Motions (§ II.A) and could be for work that is unrelated to discovery issues raised in the Motions (§ III.A); arbitrary allocation of time and description is too vague to determine if allocation is $980.00 reasonable (§ II.C).

Production review; draft outline concerning 8/22/2006 DiTomo privilege log deficiencies.

8.0

4.0

$245.00

Production review; Finalize drafting memorandum re legal standards to assess 8/23/2006 DiTomo sufficiency of privilege log. DiTomo Total

3.7

2.0 12.0

$245.00

"Production Review" is too vague to determine if related to the Motions (§ II.A) or is work that would have been performed regardless of the discovery dispute (§ III.A); arbitrary allocation of time and $490.00 description is too vague to determine if allocation is reasonable (§ II.C). $2,940.00

Timekeeper A. Gilchrist Sparks III S. Mark Hurd Samuel T. Hirzel II John P. DiTomo Total

Hours Claimed 7.5 27.4 79.2 12.0 126.1

Total $4,883.50 $13,600.00 $22,682.00 $2,940.00 $44,105.50

264924

5 of 5