International Petroleum Products and Additives Company v. Black Gold S.A.R.L.

Background

IPAC filed an arbitration demand alleging that Black Gold and its chief executive officer breached agreements governing Black Gold’s role as IPAC’s sales representative and distributor. The arbitrator ruled for IPAC and awarded $1,094,193.58, consisting of damages, fees and costs, and American Arbitration Association fees and costs.

IPAC later asked this court to confirm the arbitration award. Black Gold opposed confirmation and asked the court to vacate, or alternatively modify or correct, the award. On November 8, 2019, the court granted IPAC’s motion to confirm and denied Black Gold’s countermotion. The court then entered judgment.

Fee and Cost Request

IPAC sought $53,720 in attorneys’ fees for preparing and litigating the petition to confirm the award and opposing Black Gold’s motion, $8,500 for preparing the fee motion, and $32,999.78 in post-arbitration costs. IPAC relied on a provision in the Exclusive Distributor Agreement allowing the costs of the proceeding, including attorneys’ fees and other specified expenses, to be assessed according to fault. The opinion states that Black Gold did not contest IPAC’s entitlement to fees under that provision.

The court used California’s lodestar method, which generally calculates fees by multiplying reasonable hours by a reasonable hourly rate. It accepted the requested hourly rate of $425. The court found that IPAC’s counsel had sufficiently supported the rate despite providing relatively limited evidence, and that the rate was reasonable in light of Bay Area market rates and rates previously approved by the court.

Hours and Separate Monaco Proceeding

The court found that IPAC could recover for work on the federal proceeding and for efforts to serve Black Gold in Monaco through the Hague Convention. It denied recovery for work on a separate Monaco proceeding to enforce the arbitration award because the arbitrator had not awarded fees for international enforcement, IPAC cited no authority supporting recovery for work in a separate proceeding before another court, and IPAC did not provide enough information about the Monaco proceeding.

Because IPAC’s billing entries combined tasks and did not separately identify time spent on the federal case and the Monaco enforcement proceeding, the court ordered IPAC to submit supplemental information. Without a timely statement, the court would apply a 20 percent reduction to the hours billed from May 1 through October 31, 2019.

For work on the fee motion and bill of costs after November 1, 2019, IPAC relied on a declaration stating that counsel spent about 20 hours but did not provide billing invoices or other detailed evidence. The court ordered IPAC to submit supporting evidence. Without timely evidence, the court would reduce this category by 10 percent, allowing recovery for 18 hours.

Using 119.12 hours and the $425 hourly rate, the court stated that IPAC was entitled to $50,626 in attorneys’ fees, subject to the possible adjustments described above.

Costs

The court allowed costs reasonably related to litigating in this court and serving Black Gold in Monaco, but not costs for enforcing the award in Monaco. It allowed the $400 federal filing fee. It found the $990.80 charge for preparing chambers copies excessive because IPAC submitted copies of all cited cases and required additional evidence; absent that evidence, the amount would be reduced to $792.64.

The court also required more detail concerning the $15,836.02 paid to the Zabaldano law firm for service in Monaco. Without sufficient detail, the court would reduce that amount by 35 percent to $10,293.41. It denied the $89.51 Apostille-document mailing cost, the $450 Apostille-service cost, and $9,210.49 related to Monaco enforcement. Of the $6,022.96 translation expense, it allowed the $4,622.96 attributed to service but denied the $1,400 attributed to enforcement.

The body of the order therefore stated a costs award of $16,109.01, subject to adjustment based on supplemental evidence. The conclusion stated that, if IPAC failed to provide the required statement, Black Gold would pay a total of $66,735.01, consisting of $50,626 in fees and $16,109.01 in costs.

Ruling and Further Proceedings

The court granted in part and denied in part IPAC’s motion for attorneys’ fees and costs. It scheduled a compliance hearing for March 6, 2020, and directed IPAC to file supplemental information by February 28, 2020, concerning hours spent on the federal and Monaco proceedings, hours worked after November 1, 2019, and costs for preparing the case-authority binder.

The order also stated that IPAC would not receive costs already included in the clerk’s taxation of costs, to avoid duplication. The court terminated IPAC’s motion challenging that taxation as moot and terminated Docket Numbers 43 and 44.