Faizi v. Temori
- Virginia Demarchi
- 5:22-cv-04224
- U.S. District Court · Northern District of California
- 4
In Faizi v. Temori, Judge DeMarchi granted Falafel Flame’s $5,100 attorneys’ fee application after an uncontested contempt motion.
Falafel Flame, Inc. received a $5,100 attorneys’ fee award. The award covered $2,950 for work by the Law Office of Kenneth Seligson and $2,150 for work by the Emran Law Firm. Defendants did not oppose the application.
What happened
In Faizi v. Temori, Ahmad Mukhtar Faizi sought attorneys’ fees for work on Falafel Flame’s behalf in connection with a second motion for contempt. The court had previously ruled that Falafel Flame could recover reasonable fees and costs, and defendants filed no opposition to the fee application.
The court used the lodestar method, which calculates fees by multiplying reasonable hours by reasonable hourly rates. It found the requested hours reasonable and accepted the requested rates for the attorneys, a law clerk, and a paralegal, including the law clerk’s rate because defendants did not object.
Judge Virginia K. DeMarchi granted the application and awarded Falafel Flame $2,950 for Kenneth Seligson’s work and $2,150 for Emran Law Firm’s work, totaling $5,100. The court directed the Clerk to enter an amended judgment.
The detailed version
- Faizi v. Temori · No. 5:22-cv-04224
- Virginia Demarchi
- Nov. 25, 2024
Background
The court had previously deferred ruling on Ahmad Mukhtar Faizi’s request for attorneys’ fees related to a July 5, 2023 second motion for contempt that he filed on Falafel Flame’s behalf. In an earlier order, the court found that Falafel Flame could recover reasonable attorneys’ fees and costs connected with that motion. The court also stated that it could amend the August 14, 2024 judgment to include any fees and costs awarded.
Plaintiff’s counsel submitted a fee application seeking $2,150 for work performed by the Emran Law Firm and $2,950 for work performed by the Law Office of Kenneth Seligson. The application did not seek costs. Defendants had an opportunity to respond but filed no opposition or other response.
Legal Standard
The court applied the lodestar method, which generally determines a reasonable fee by multiplying the number of hours reasonably spent on the matter by a reasonable hourly rate. The party seeking fees must provide evidence supporting both the hours worked and the rates requested. Courts may reduce hours that are inadequately documented, excessive, duplicative, or unnecessary.
A reasonable hourly rate is generally based on rates prevailing in the relevant community for similar work performed by lawyers with reasonably comparable skill, experience, and reputation. The court identified the relevant community as the forum in which it sits.
Hourly Rates
The application used a discounted hourly rate of $250 for attorneys Kenneth Seligson and Emran. Seligson stated that his practice involves business disputes among shareholders and businesses and that his customary rate for those matters is $420. Emran stated that his practice involves litigation, specifically business and intellectual-property matters, and that his customary rate for those matters is $450. Emran also stated that he was admitted to the California bar in December 2019.
The court had previously concluded that a $250 hourly rate for Seligson and Emran was reasonable, based on decisions from other courts in the Northern District of California. The court relied on that earlier conclusion here.
Seligson also sought fees for Richard Jordan, identified as a post-bar law clerk, at $250 per hour. The court noted that Seligson provided no additional information supporting that rate and that the rate appeared high compared with rates in similar cases. However, because defendants did not object, the court accepted Jordan’s $250 hourly rate.
Emran sought fees for Shivanjali Naicker, identified as a paralegal formerly with Emran’s firm, at $185 per hour. Although Emran provided no further support for that rate, the court found that decisions from other courts in the district suggested that $185 was within the prevailing range for similar paralegal services.
Hours and Award
After reviewing the timesheets submitted by Emran and Seligson, the court found that the claimed hours were reasonable. It granted Seligson’s requested fees of $2,950 and Emran’s requested fees of $2,150.
Disposition
The court granted the plaintiff’s application for attorneys’ fees and awarded Falafel Flame a total of $5,100 in connection with the July 5, 2023 second motion for contempt. It directed the Clerk of Court to enter an amended judgment accordingly.
Read the full 4-page opinion on CourtListener, the free public archive maintained by the Free Law Project.