Source: s3://data.kl3m.ai/documents/govinfo/USCOURTS/USCOURTS-caed-2_04-cv-00620/USCOURTS-caed-2_04-cv-00620-4/pdf.json

Nature of Suit Code: 440
Nature of Suit: Other Civil Rights
Cause of Action: 42:12101 Americans with Disabilities Act

---

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25

26

27

28

1

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

----oo0oo----

SHERIE WHITE,

NO. CIV. S-04-0620 WBS KJM

Plaintiff, 

v. ORDER RE: COSTS

GMRI, INC., dba Red Lobster,

Defendant.

----oo0oo----

On November 21, 2005, the court entered final judgment

in favor of plaintiff. Plaintiff then submitted a cost bill

totaling $729.48. Defendant does not object.

Rule 54(d)(1) of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure

and Local Rule 54-292(f) govern the taxation of costs to losing

parties, subject to limits set under 28 U.S.C. § 1920. See 28

U.S.C. § 1920 (enumerating taxable costs); Fed. R. Civ. P.

54(d)(1) (“[C]osts other than attorneys’ fees shall be allowed as

of course to the prevailing party unless the court otherwise

directs . . . .”); L.R. 54-292(f); Crawford Fitting Co. v. J.T.

Gibbons, Inc., 482 U.S. 437, 441 (1987) (limiting taxable costs

to those enumerated in 28 U.S.C. § 1920). The district court has

Case 2:04-cv-00620-WBS -CMK Document 72 Filed 02/21/06 Page 1 of 2
1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25

26

27

28

2

discretion to determine what constitutes a taxable cost within

the meaning of 28 U.S.C. § 1920. Amarel v. Connell, 102 F.3d

1494, 1523 (9th Cir. 1997); Alflex Corp. v. Underwriters’ Lab.,

Inc., 914 F.2d 175, 177 (9th Cir. 1990). The losing party has

the burden of overcoming the presumption in favor of awarding

costs to the prevailing party. See Russian River Watershed

Protection Comm. v. City of Santa Rosa, 142 F.3d 1136, 1144 (9th

Cir. 1998); Amarel, 102 F.3d at 1523.

After reviewing the bill, the court finds all costs to

have been previously awarded by order of this court. (See Jan.

20, 2006 Order.)

Accordingly, costs of $729.48 will be denied.

 IT IS SO ORDERED.

DATED: February 17, 2006

 

Case 2:04-cv-00620-WBS -CMK Document 72 Filed 02/21/06 Page 2 of 2