Source: s3://data.kl3m.ai/documents/govinfo/USCOURTS/USCOURTS-caed-1_05-cv-00594/USCOURTS-caed-1_05-cv-00594-13/pdf.json

Nature of Suit Code: 870
Nature of Suit: Tax Suits
Cause of Action: 28:2201 Injunction

---

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

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, )

)

Plaintiff, )

v. )

)

STEVEN HEMPFLING, d/b/a/ FREE )

ENTERPRISE SOCIETY, )

)

Defendant. )

)

 )

1:05-cv-00594-LJO-SMS

ORDER DIRECTING DEFENDANT AND

DEFENDANT’S COUNSEL TO PAY

$554.75 TO COUNSEL FOR PLAINTIFF

NO LATER THAN MARCH 10, 2008, AS

FEES AND EXPENSES RELATING TO

PLAINTIFF’S MOTION TO COMPEL AND

FOR SANCTIONS (DOCS. 108, 115)

Plaintiff is proceeding with a civil action in this Court.

The matter has been referred to the Magistrate Judge pursuant to

28 U.S.C. § 636(b) and Local Rules 72-302(c)(1) and 72-303.

On January 30, 2008, the Court granted Plaintiff’s motion to

compel responses to the first sets of interrogatories and

requests for production, including Plaintiff’s prayer for the

reasonable expenses and attorney’s fees, caused by Defendant’s

failure to provide discovery. The Court found that Defendant’s

noncompliance with his discovery obligations was not

substantially justified and that there were no other

circumstances making an award of expense unjust; the Court

directed Plaintiff’s counsel to submit information concerning the

Case 1:05-cv-00594-LJO -SMS Document 138 Filed 02/25/08 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

nature and extent of Plaintiff’s expenses. (Order pp. 5-6.) By

declarations filed on February 12, 2008, Robert D. Metcalfe,

trial attorney for the United States Department of Justice, Tax

Division, and Susan Von Raab, the staff member responsible for

directing the Tax Division’s budget and financial management

program, complied (Docs. 126 and 125, respectively). Their

declarations provide a substantial and adequate basis for

determining an hourly rate and the sum of hours expended.

The Court finds that Mr. Metcalfe reasonably expended 3.5

hours on researching the law, drafting and reviewing the motion

to compel discovery and associated documents; the Court declines

to find the .5 hour spent on the clerical task of scanning the

documents and filing them with the Court was reasonably expended.

The Court finds that a reasonable hourly rate for Mr.

Metcalfe’s services is $158.50.

Accordingly, pursuant to Fed. R. Civ. P. 37(d), Defendant

and Defendant’s counsel ARE ORDERED to pay 3.5 times $158.50, or

$554.75, to Plaintiff’s counsel no later than March 10, 2008. 

IT IS SO ORDERED.

Dated: February 25, 2008 /s/ Sandra M. Snyder 

icido3 UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE

Case 1:05-cv-00594-LJO -SMS Document 138 Filed 02/25/08 Page 2 of 2