Source: s3://data.kl3m.ai/documents/govinfo/USCOURTS/USCOURTS-casd-3_12-cv-03042/USCOURTS-casd-3_12-cv-03042-0/pdf.json

Nature of Suit Code: 840
Nature of Suit: Trademark
Cause of Action: 15:1114 Trademark Infringement

---

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

SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

CHOICE HOTELS

INTERNATIONAL, INC., a Delaware

Corporation,

Plaintiff,

CASE NO. 12cv3042-WQHWMc

ORDER

vs.

SUDHA PATEL, an individual;

NAVNIT PATEL, an individual;

KETAN PATEL, an individual; and

SHIVA-OM, INC., a California

Corporation,

Defendants.

HAYES, Judge:

The matter before the Court is the Motion for Attorneys’ Fees filed by Plaintiff

Choice Hotels International, Inc. (“Choice Hotels”). (ECF No. 26).

I. Background

On December 21, 2012, Plaintiff initiated this action by filing a Complaint in this

Court. (ECF No. 1). The Complaint alleges claims for (1) federal trademark

infringement in violation of 15 U.S.C. § 1114, (2) false designation of origin in

violation of 11 U.S.C. § 1125(a), (3) unfair competition in violation of California

Business & Professions Code § 17200, (4) trademark infringement in violation of

California Business & Professions Code § 14245, and (5) anti-cybersquatting in

violation of 15 U.S.C. § 1125(d). The Complaint seeks damages, injunctive relief and

attorneys’ fees and costs.

On February 11, 2013, the Clerk of the Court entered default as to the individual

-1- 12cv3042-WQH-WMc

Case 3:12-cv-03042-WQH-WMC Document 30 Filed 10/04/13 Page 1 of 3
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. (ECF Nos. 11-13). On March 7, 2013, the Clerk of the Court entered

default as to corporate Defendant Shiva-Om. (ECF No. 17). On April 2, 2013, Plaintiff

filed the Motion for Default Judgment against all Defendants. (ECF No. 19). 

Defendants did not file a response to the Motion for Default Judgment.

On June 11, 2013, the Court granted the Motion for Default Judgment (ECF No.

21), and entered Judgment against Defendants (ECF No. 23). The Court permanently

enjoined Defendants from using any of the marks in the Plantiff’s Econo Lodge family

of marks, awarded damages and concluded that Plaintiff is entitled to an award of

reasonable attorneys’ fees. 

On July 11, 2013, Plaintiff filed the Motion for Attorneys’ Fees. (ECF No. 26). 

In support of the motion, Plaintiff submitted a memorandum, a declaration and an

exhibit. The motion contains a certificate of service, indicating that the motion was

served upon Defendants.

The docket reflects that Defendants have not filed a response to the Motion for

Attorneys’ Fees.

II. Discussion

In the June 11, 2013 Order, the Court concluded that Plaintiff is entitled to

reasonable attorneys’ fees and costs pursuant to the Lanham Act, 15 U.S.C. § 1117(a). 

(ECF No. 21 at 11). The sole remaining issue is whether the amount of fees and costs

sought by Plaintiff is reasonable.

Plaintiff seeks its “attorney’s fees incurred in this case, in the amount of

$17,225.00.” (ECF No. 26). In a declaration, Plaintiffs’ counsel, Kimberly D. Howatt,

states that invoices rendered on behalf of Plaintiff from December 2012 through July

2013 reflect 50.7 hours of attorney hours performed by Plaintiff’s counsel, billed at an

hourly rate of $325. (ECF No. 26-2). Howatt’s declaration states that, “[i]ncluding an

additional amount of time billed on this matter in June and July 2013, the total amount

of attorney’s fees incurred by Choice Hotels are at least $17,225.00.” Id.

“In the Ninth Circuit, the customary method of determining the permissible

-2- 12cv3042-WQH-WMc

Case 3:12-cv-03042-WQH-WMC Document 30 Filed 10/04/13 Page 2 of 3
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

amount of attorneys’ fees ... is the ‘lodestar’ method. The lodestar method multiplies

the number of hours the prevailing party reasonably expended on the litigation by a

reasonable hourly rate.” Ballen v. City of Redmond, 466 F.3d 736, 746 (9th Cir. 2006)

(quotation omitted). “After making [the lodestar] computation, courts then assess

whether it is necessary to adjust the presumptively reasonable lodestar figure on the

basis of twelve factors.” Id. (citation omitted). The twelve factors are:

(1) the time and labor required, (2) the novelty and difficulty of the

questions involved, (3) the skill requisite to perform the legal service properly, (4) the preclusion of other employment by the attorney due to acceptance of the case, (5) the customary fee, (6) whether the fee is fixed or contingent, (7) time limitations imposed by the client or the

circumstances, (8) the amount involved and the results obtained, (9) the

experience, reputation, and ability of the attorneys, (10) the ‘undesirability’ of the case, (11) the nature and length of the professional relationship with the client, and (12) awards in similar cases.

Id. (citing, inter alia, Kerr v. Screen Extras Guild, Inc., 526 F.2d 67, 70 (9th Cir.

1975)). “[O]nly in rare circumstances should a court adjust the lodestar figure, as this

figure is the presumptively accurate measure of reasonable fees.” Id. (citations

omitted).

After reviewing Plaintiff’s Motion for Attorneys’ Fees, Howatt’s declaration, the

attached evidence and the record in this case, the Court concludes that Plaintiff has

accurately calculated its requested fees according to the lodestar method, and that the

requested hourly rate and the requested amount of hours are reasonable. The Court

concludes that the presumptively reasonable lodestar figure of $17,225.00 should not

be adjusted on the basis of the applicable factors.

III. Conclusion

IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that the Motion for Attorneys’ Fees is GRANTED. 

(ECF No. 26). Plaintiff is awarded $17,225.00 in attorneys’ fees.

DATED: October 4, 2013

WILLIAM Q. HAYES

United States District Judge

-3- 12cv3042-WQH-WMc

Case 3:12-cv-03042-WQH-WMC Document 30 Filed 10/04/13 Page 3 of 3