Source: s3://data.kl3m.ai/documents/govinfo/USCOURTS/USCOURTS-caed-2_05-cv-02080/USCOURTS-caed-2_05-cv-02080-5/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

1

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

----oo0oo----

MARJORIE C. PINO,

individually, and as a

representative of the estate

of decedent RONNIE PINO,

NO. CIV. S-05-2080 WBS DAD

Plaintiff,

v.

ORDER RE: COSTS

CITY OF SACRAMENTO, SACRAMENTO 

COUNTY, ALBERT NARJERA, LOU 

BLANAS, PSYCHIATRIC SOLUTIONS, 

INC., and DOES 1 through 75, 

inclusive, 

Defendants.

----oo0oo----

On January 26, 2007, the court entered final judgment

in this case in favor of defendants. Defendant Psychiatric

Solutions has submitted a cost bill totaling $4,238.78; plaintiff

has not objected.

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

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

Case 2:05-cv-02080-WBS-DAD Document 85 Filed 04/03/07 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

parties, which are generally subject to the provisions of 28

U.S.C. § 1920.

The court exercises its discretion in determining

whether to allow certain costs. Alflex Corp. v. Underwriters

Labs., 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 Prot.

Comm. v. City of Santa Rosa, 142 F.3d 1136, 1144 (9th Cir. 1998)

(noting that the presumption “may only be overcome by pointing to

some impropriety on the part of the prevailing party”); Amarel,

102 F.3d at 1523; see also L.R. 54-292(d) (“If no objection is

filed, the Clerk shall proceed to tax and enter costs.”).

After reviewing the bill, and in light of the fact that

the losing party has not objected, the court finds all costs to

be reasonable. Accordingly, defendant Psychiatric Solutions’

cost bill of $4,238.78 will be allowed.

IT IS SO ORDERED. 

DATED: April 3, 2007

Case 2:05-cv-02080-WBS-DAD Document 85 Filed 04/03/07 Page 2 of 2