Innovative Sports Management, Inc. d/b/a Integrated Sports Media v. Guerrero
- William Alsup
- 3:22-cv-05773
- U.S. District Court · Northern District of California
- 5
Innovative Sports Management v. Jeanette Ruiz Arias: Judge Alsup granted the fee motion in part, awarding $2,699.75 in fees and $1,560.74 in costs.
Innovative Sports Management, Inc. received $2,699.75 in attorney’s fees and $1,560.74 in costs from Jeanette Ruiz Arias and 818 Sports Bar & Grill, Inc., in addition to the earlier $9,050 damages award.
What happened
In Innovative Sports Management, Inc. d/b/a Integrated Sports Media v. Jeanette Ruiz Arias and 818 Sports Bar & Grill, Inc., the court considered the plaintiff’s request for attorney’s fees and costs after an earlier default judgment concerning a pirated soccer-game broadcast.
The plaintiff requested $10,291.90 in attorney’s fees and $3,379.77 in costs. The court found that several billed hours were excessive, duplicative, clerical, or inadequately documented, and it reduced the requested travel costs and other expenses.
Judge William Alsup granted the motion in part. He awarded $2,699.75 in attorney’s fees and $1,560.74 in costs, for a total of $4,260.49, in addition to the previously awarded $9,050 in damages.
The detailed version
- Innovative Sports Management, Inc. d/b/a Integrated Sports Media v. Guerrero · No. 3:22-cv-05773
- William Alsup
- June 27, 2023
Background
An earlier order granted Innovative Sports Management, Inc. default judgment and awarded $9,050 against Jeanette Ruiz Arias and 818 Sports Bar & Grill, Inc. for pirating a soccer-game broadcast in violation of 47 U.S.C. § 553. That order allowed the plaintiff to seek reasonable attorney’s fees. The plaintiff then requested $10,291.90 in attorney’s fees and $3,379.77 in costs.
Attorney’s Fees
The court explained that an award under § 553 is discretionary. It primarily used the lodestar method, which calculates fees by multiplying reasonable hours by reasonable hourly rates. The court found the requested hourly rates reasonable but rejected several categories of billed time.
The court found that Attorney Riley’s non-travel work was unreasonable because some tasks were duplicative, clerical, or could have been performed while traveling. It also found that the administrative assistants’ work consisted of clerical tasks that should have been treated as firm overhead rather than billed as attorney’s fees. After excluding those hours, the court calculated a lodestar of $5,399.50 for 17.54 hours of travel time and research-attorney work.
The court then reduced that amount by 25 percent because counsel reconstructed the billing records rather than recording the hours contemporaneously. It separately reduced the research attorney’s and Attorney Riley’s billable amounts by 25 percent because the case did not present unusual challenges and extensive research was unnecessary. These reductions produced a total fee award of $2,699.75.
The court also cross-checked that amount against the percentage-of-recovery method. Twenty-five percent of the previously awarded $9,050 in damages was $2,262.50, which the court said was consistent with its lodestar calculation.
Costs
The plaintiff requested $3,379.77 in costs, most of which consisted of travel and investigative expenses. The court declined to award pre-filing investigative expenses and courier fees. It also reduced the travel costs by half because of relatively expensive flights and a hotel stay. After adding the filing fee and service-of-process charges, the court awarded $1,560.74 in costs.
Ruling
Judge William Alsup ordered that the plaintiff’s motion for attorney’s fees be GRANTED IN PART. The plaintiff was awarded $2,699.75 in attorney’s fees and $1,560.74 in costs, for a total of $4,260.49. The court stated that final judgment reflecting this award and the prior damages award would be entered.
Read the full 5-page opinion on CourtListener, the free public archive maintained by the Free Law Project.