Source: s3://data.kl3m.ai/documents/govinfo/USCOURTS/USCOURTS-cand-3_05-cv-00946/USCOURTS-cand-3_05-cv-00946-5/pdf.json

Nature of Suit Code: 690
Nature of Suit: Other Forfeiture and Penalty Suits
Cause of Action: 18:1961 Racketeering (RICO) Act

---

United States District Court

For the Northern District of California

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

United States District Court

For the Northern District of California

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

FOR THE NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,

Plaintiff,

 v.

$1,379,879.09 SEIZED FROM BANK OF

AMERICA, ET. AL,

Defendant. /

No. C 05-0946 CRB

BRIEFING ORDER

Now pending before the Court is Eurofed’s motion for attorney’s fees and costs. 

Without invoices detailing the work performed on the case, the Court is unable to determine

whether the requested fees and costs are reasonable. Eurofed maintains that turning over

unredacted invoices to the government would violate the attorney-client privilege. But the

Ninth Circuit has held that “fee information generally is not privileged.” Tornay v. United

States, 840 F.2d 1424, 1426 (9th Cir. 1988). “Payment of fees is incidental to the

attorney-client relationship, and does not usually involve disclosure of confidential

communications arising from the professional relationship.” Id. In any event, the Ninth

Circuit has affirmed district court orders compelling the party seeking fees to submit invoices

in camera. See Federal Sav. and Loan Ins. Corp. v. Ferm, 909 F.2d 372, 374-75 (9th Cir.

1990). Accordingly, Eurofed is ordered to submit all relevant invoices to the Court in

camera by Monday, June 30, 2008.

Case 3:05-cv-00946-CRB Document 77 Filed 06/23/08 Page 1 of 2
United States District Court

For the Northern District of California

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

G:\CRBALL\2005\0946\Briefing Order.wpd 2

In addition, the parties are permitted to file supplementary briefs not to exceed ten

(10) pages by June 30 addressing: (1) developments in the law on the meaning of

“substantially prevails” as used in 28 U.S.C. § 2465(b); and (2) whether Eurofed may be

considered a “claimant . . . convicted of a crime,” id. § 2565(b)(2)(B), because the bank was

owned, at least in part, by Pavel Lazarenko. 

In order to permit the Court to review the submissions, the hearing scheduled for July

11, 2008 is VACATED and rescheduled for July 25, 2008.

IT IS SO ORDERED.

Dated: June 23, 2008 

CHARLES R. BREYER

UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE

Case 3:05-cv-00946-CRB Document 77 Filed 06/23/08 Page 2 of 2