Source: s3://data.kl3m.ai/documents/govinfo/USCOURTS/USCOURTS-caed-2_03-cv-01553/USCOURTS-caed-2_03-cv-01553-3/pdf.json

Nature of Suit Code: 440
Nature of Suit: Other Civil Rights
Cause of Action: 42:1983 Civil Rights 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

Defendants request only $718.48 in costs for 1

exemplification and copies, but the total of the costs listed on

the attachment under the same section is $792.23. This larger

number is supported by the invoices. The court is uncertain why

defendants seek to recover only $718.48 of those costs, but will

1

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

----oo0oo----

ANTHONY J. VALADEZ,

NO. CIV. S-03-1553 WBS PAN-PS

Plaintiff, 

v. ORDER RE: COSTS FOR DEFENDANTS

WESTERN SIERRA MEDICAL CLINIC,

LYNN JAKOBS, AND FRANK J. LANG

COUNTY OF SIERRA, CALIFORNIA

SIERRA COUNTY JAIL, SIERRA

COUNTY SHERIFF’S DEPARTMENT,

WESTERN SIERRA MEDICAL CLINIC,

JUDGE WILLIAM PANGMAN, SHERIFF

LELAND ADAMS, CORPORAL LOU

FOXWORTHY, LYNN JAKOBS, FRANK

J. LANG, and DOES 1-20,

Defendants.

----oo0oo----

On June 2, 2005, the court entered final judgment in

favor of defendants in this case. Defendants Western Sierra

Medical Clinic, Lynn Jakobs, and Frank J. Lang have submitted a

cost bill totaling $4,917.66. Plaintiff does not object. 1

Case 2:03-cv-01553-WBS-PAN Document 86 Filed 07/13/05 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 not compel them to seek the full amount.

2

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)(“costs 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,

482 U.S. 437, 441 (1987)(limiting taxable costs to those

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

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.

The court finds all costs to be reasonable. 

Accordingly, the cost of $4,917.66 will be allowed.

 IT IS SO ORDERED.

DATED: July 12, 2005

Case 2:03-cv-01553-WBS-PAN Document 86 Filed 07/13/05 Page 2 of 2