Innovative Sports Management, Inc. v. Lizcano Reyes
- Pitts
- 5:24-cv-07917
- U.S. District Court · Northern District of California
- 4
In Innovative Sports Management v. Lady Z. Lizcano Reyes, Judge Pitts granted in part and denied in part the fees-and-costs motion, awarding $3,862.34.
Innovative Sports Management receives $3,283.59 in attorney’s fees and $578.75 in costs from the award in the case; Lady Z. Lizcano Reyes is the opposing party affected by that award.
What happened
Innovative Sports Management sued Lady Z. Lizcano Reyes over the public display of a soccer match without a license. After entering default judgment, the court awarded Innovative $2,000 in damages.
Innovative then sought $5,837.50 in attorney’s fees and $1,328.75 in costs. The court reduced the fees because the billing records were reconstructed after the work and because the case involved work the firm regularly performs. It also denied recovery of $750 in pre-lawsuit investigative expenses.
Judge Pitts granted in part and denied in part the motion. The court awarded Innovative $3,283.59 in attorney’s fees and $578.75 in costs, for a total of $3,862.34.
The detailed version
- Innovative Sports Management, Inc. v. Lizcano Reyes · No. 5:24-cv-07917
- Pitts
- Oct. 7, 2025
Background
Innovative Sports Management sued Lady Z. Lizcano Reyes, alleging that she publicly displayed without a license a soccer match for which Innovative owned commercial-exhibition rights. On August 11, 2025, the court entered default judgment and awarded Innovative $750 in statutory damages under 47 U.S.C. § 553, $500 in enhanced damages under that statute, and $750 for conversion, totaling $2,000. Innovative later moved for attorney’s fees and costs under 47 U.S.C. § 553(c)(2)(C).
Attorney’s Fees
Innovative requested $5,837.50 in attorney’s fees: $4,050 for six hours of work by attorney Thomas P. Riley at $675 per hour, and $1,787.50 for 5.5 hours by an unidentified research attorney at $325 per hour. The court found the hourly rates reasonable but reduced the requested hours for two reasons. First, the billing records were reconstructed rather than created at the time the work was performed, making them less reliable and more susceptible to inflated time. The court applied a 25 percent reduction on that basis. Second, the court found that another 25 percent reduction was justified because Innovative’s counsel’s firm routinely files similar claims and the extensive research billed was largely unnecessary in this case.
After both reductions, the court calculated the fee award at $3,283.59. The court also considered that Innovative had sought $28,750 in default judgment but received $2,000. It concluded that a fee award exceeding 150 percent of the underlying judgment was appropriate and consistent with awards in similar matters.
Costs
Innovative requested $1,328.75 in costs: $405 for the complaint filing fee, $75 for service of process, $98.75 for a transcript request, and $750 for investigative expenses. The court awarded the filing fee, service charge, and transcript fee, totaling $578.75. It excluded the $750 in investigative expenses because they were incurred before the lawsuit and were not costs of prosecuting it.
Disposition
The court granted in part and denied in part Innovative’s motion for attorney’s fees and costs. It awarded $3,283.59 in attorney’s fees and $578.75 in costs, for a total award of $3,862.34. The order was signed by United States District Judge P. Casey Pitts.
Read the full 4-page opinion on CourtListener, the free public archive maintained by the Free Law Project.