i filed suit against charles lance for copyright infringement for allegedly publishing my copyrighted photograph on his website i viewed that photograph on his web site for the first time that i filed suit against the wrong person based on the information i dismissed mr white's let's ask the district court to order chinese species as a i've been wondering about i mean you know you it why why wasn't the answer which denied all allegations of infringement was sufficient to apprise you of the fact that it was not he who published the photo because your honor answers don't really handle serving in iraq authorities that what you're saying is i think that the district court has a rule that is blatantly inconsistent with the national rules also your honor that that they did not comply with left answer less than two months after the action was initiated your honor i think had just made the pick up the telephone i did i did talk to pick up the telephone and ask him specifically in fact the judge that the magistrate judge asked to ask him at the pretrial whether or not he had any ducked the question the defendant  you started in your papers that the defendant's attorney mr lance's attorney knew as early as march of two thousand and thirteen that's correct that six weeks of the complaint being filed that's right that his client did not publish the photo that's correct and i didn't see the evidence to support for that was that in something he admitted to in deposition yes and that deposition is in the record yes it is a  and that he acknowledged knowing as early as march of two thousand and thirteen that's correct that is client never published the photo that's correct it seems to me that the district court it's simply that the billing records that were sent to lance and to the insurance company are different than the billing records that were submitted in support of their petition and the court should have and i did i didn't ask for it to be under seal i just was complying with his wishes which was that they were confidential and and he said put those under seal i did so and then it was up to him to let me also address one other issue that they that the court did not follow is my time what in the record shows that lance was ever contractually obliged to pay more than two hundred fifty dollars an hour the engagement letter that is in for record talks about the  specified at the time my standard r p going right was four hundred and ten top because that's not a question question is not whether some other clients pay that rate or whether that was the standard rate but what was the rate that lance agreed to pay you know their one understanding of this record is that under the the contracts lance was to pay two hundred fifty dollars an hour in belmont and four hundred  ten dollars an hour if lance won which looks like it's a wager with bell's money rather than an obligation rather than putting plants at risk of paying if more t understood the designated evidence included two affidavits of counsel stating what these our rewrite was and the court was entitled to determine what a reasonable hour rate was the court that's perfectly straightforward proposition and what the court said was that mr lance was i apply for whatever the insurance company get paid it said and it was within the terminated the litigation if i understand your your question your honor as a defense attorney clients frequently come to me and say i didn't do it my job is to say fine but let me wait and see what the plaintiff's evidence is when my client came to me and said he didn't do it that's how i answered the complaint i denied all allegations that was enough to put mr bell on notice that my client denied the allegations but nonetheless i served discovery on mr bell and lo and behold he was not able to prove provide any evidence that my client had committed infringement in fact the court in its order specifically concluded in the appendix that page three quote mr powell had no evidence to support his claim against mr lance the court went on to say the motivation of mr bell when filing this action appears to be an attempt to extract quick small settlements from many defendants instead of using the judicial process to protect his copyright against intimate actors but evidence was before her and that would have indicated that he is doing this that he was using the courts to extract quick small settlements from  among those forty seven the defendants he has filed multiple suits alleging infringement of the same copyright in the in the same port also many of those were against multiple defendants the records  of those suits show that he is settling them against the individual and the defendants for very small amounts they court specifically said in the record at page four that f this action caused an undue waste of the parties and the courts resources in the courts sad quote that bell was quote filing mera suits in and temp in an attempt to outmaneuver the legal system the court had sufficient grounds to exercise its judgment and award the full amount of the requested lodestar attorney's fees among the evidence before the court was even a feed titian from one of mr bell's sr cases that went through summary judgment and that one was for fifty five thousand dollars the court also had for it a survey from the american intellectual property laws o c a sion for copyright infringement actions through summary judgment is geographic area and it showed that the average attorneys these through summary judgment was one hundred thirty two thousand dollars i submit it would have been within the court's discretion to the bottom line is that the district court did not abuse its discretion in awarding attorneys fees based on the vote starr calculation why didn't you file an early motion for summary judgment with an affidavit from your client saying he never posted the photo it would i think it would be imprudent i said to serve a summary judgment motion until i get the responses to discovery from miss well if you knew if you knew from your client that he never posted the photo why wasn't that enough to proceed to get the case dismissed early because i didn't know what mr what evidence mr bell may have been hiding was like point teeth trying to get discovery responses from him and i wanted to wait until the close of discovery when i knew that i could not be prejudiced by any further last minute revelations of evidence from mr bell thank you thank you baker botts provides that and makes clear that absent express statutory authorization no lawyer has compensated for feed defense with the district court and as you think the supreme court is overruled commissioner the court in baker botts held that the american rule is supplanted where statute is language that authorizes reasonable fees to prevailing party which in precisely the same language as in the copyright act i don't see where retired justice thomas said in our legal system no czerny's regardless of whether they practice in bankruptcy earned title to receive the four feet defense litigation express