Source: s3://data.kl3m.ai/documents/govinfo/USCOURTS/USCOURTS-azd-4_04-cv-00352/USCOURTS-azd-4_04-cv-00352-2/pdf.json

Nature of Suit Code: 450
Nature of Suit: Interstate Commerce
Cause of Action: 28:1446 Petition for Removal- Property Damage (P.I.)

---

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

WO

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

FOR THE DISTRICT OF ARIZONA

KPX, L.L.C., an Arizona limited liability

company, 

Plaintiff, 

vs.

Transgroup Worldwide Logistics, Inc., a

Washington corporation; Transgroup

Express, Inc., a Washington corporation, 

Defendants. 

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

CV 04-352 TUC DCB

ORDER

On February 21, 2006, this Court affirmed its December 1, 2005, entry of summary

judgment in favor of the Plaintiff KPX, L.L.C. (KPX). The Court amended its December 1,

2005, Order to clarify its ruling regarding this Court's jurisdiction over Plaintiff's cause of

action and correspondingly amended the Judgment.

Plaintiff prevailed on Count III of its Complaint, Counts I and II were dismissed. Count

I was dismissed sua sponte by the Court, and Count II was dismissed pursuant to a summary

judgment motion filed by Defendants Transgroup Worldwide Logistics, Inc./Transgroup

Express, Inc. (Transgroup). The Third-party Complaint by Transgroup against Road-E-O

Freight and Road-E-O's counterclaim remain.

On February 21, 2006, the Court entered the Amended Judgment for KPX for $7,946.00

and awarded attorney fees for KPX, pursuant to 49 U.S.C. § 14704(e).

On March 7, 2006, KPX filed a Bill of Costs, including its request for attorneys' fees.

Case 4:04-cv-00352-DCB Document 68 Filed 04/03/06 Page 1 of 5
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 -

Transgroup filed an Objection to the Bill of Costs because attorney fees are not recoverable by

a Bill of Costs, and KPX failed to comply with federal and local rules for submitting motions

for attorney fees to this Court. KPX filed a Motion for Leave to Supplement its request for

attorney fees contained in its Bill of Costs to comply with Fed. R. Civ. P. 54(d)(2) and Local

Rule 54.2. Transgroup objected because the deadline for KPX to file a Motion for Attorney

fees has expired, and KPX is foreclosed from obtaining its attorney fees.

On March 7, 2006, Transgroup filed a Motion for Attorney Fees based on this Court's

dismissal of Counts I and II. KPX objected to Transgroup's Motion for Attorney Fees arguing

that Transgroup may not seek attorney fees as a prevailing party because even though Counts

I and II were dismissed, Transgroup did not prevail on the damage claim.

On March 20, 2006, Transgroup filed a Notice of Appeal.

Transgroup's Request for Attorney Fees.

Transgroup requests attorney fees pursuant to A.R.S. § 12-341.01 as the prevailing party

on Counts I and II. Transgroup did not prevail on these counts. Rather, this Court sua sponte

dismissed Count I, the Carmack Amendment claim, 49 U.S.C. § 14706. The Court dismissed

the Carmack Amendment claim "because the amount in controversy under the bill of lading

does not exceed $10,000.00." (Order filed February 21, 2006, (Order), at 1.) Because

transportation contracts are governed by the Carmack Amendment to the exclusion of state law

remedies, the Court dismissed the contract claim, Count II of the Complaint. (Order at 15.)

Transgroup's motion for summary judgment was granted in part as to Counts I and II,

but had no substantive affect on the case because KPX prevailed on Count III, its claim brought

pursuant to 49 U.S.C. § 14704(a)(2) for damages resulting from Transgroup's improper

issuance of an airbill. KPX's damages were measured the same as they would have been

pursuant to contract law or the Carmack Amendment: the amount specified in the bill of lading.

(Order at 17.) As to its claim for damages, KPX was the sole prevailing party. Transgroup's

request for attorney fees will be denied.

/////

Case 4:04-cv-00352-DCB Document 68 Filed 04/03/06 Page 2 of 5
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

- 3 -

KPX's Request for Attorney Fees.

The Court's Order granting summary judgment for KPX, included an award of attorney

fees, as follows: "Plaintiff's attorney fees shall be taxed and collected in this matter as part of

the costs of the action." (Order at 20.) KPX was awarded attorney fees pursuant to 49 U.S.C.

§ 14704(e), (Order at 19), which provides: "The district court shall award a reasonable

attorney's fee under this section. The district court shall tax and collect the fee as part of the

costs of the action."

However, collecting attorney fees as part of the costs of the action, pursuant to a Bill of

Costs, is contrary to Fed. R. Civ. P. 54(d)(2) and Rules of Practice of the United States District

Court for the District of Arizona (Local Rules), 54.2, which provide that "attorney fees and

related non-taxable expenses" shall be requested by motion. . .. " "Costs other than attorneys'

fees shall be allowed as of course to the prevailing party . . . Such costs may be taxed by the

clerk on one day's notice. On motion served within 5 days thereafter, the action of the clerk

may be reviewed by the court." Fed. R. Civ. P.54(d)(1).

To clarify, costs that may be taxed by the Clerk are those which shall be allowed as of

course and are submitted to the Clerk by a Bill of Costs. Attorney fees and other costs that may

or may not be allowed must be submitted to the Court by motion. In other words, attorneys'

fees are not costs that can be taxed under Rule 54(d)(1). The Cincinnati Insurance Company

v. Dynamic Development Group, L.L.C., 336 F. Supp. 2d 552, (N. C. 2004). Paragraph (d)(2)

"establishes a procedure for presenting claims for attorneys' fees, whether or not denominated

as 'costs.'" Fed. R. Civ. P.54, Advisory Committee Notes, 1993 Amendments. 

The party seeking attorney fees must file its motion within 14 days of the entry of

judgment in the action. LRCiv 54.2(b)(1); Fed. R. Civ. P.54(2)(B). Where service is

performed by mail, Rule 6(e) adds an additional three days. Here, the Amended Judgment was

entered on February 21, 2006. The motion requesting attorney fees was due March 10, 2006.

The Bill of Costs requesting attorney fees was filed on March 7, 2006, but Transgroup argues

that KPX has failed to timely file the motion for attorney fees required by the local and the

federal rules of civil procedure.

Case 4:04-cv-00352-DCB Document 68 Filed 04/03/06 Page 3 of 5
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

- 4 -

The purpose of the 14 day provision for filing the motion for attorney fees is to assure

that the opposing party is informed of the claim before the time for appeal has elapsed. Prompt

filing affords an opportunity for the court to resolve fee disputes shortly after trial, while the

services performed are freshly in mind and enable the court to appropriately make its ruling on

a fee request in time for appellate review of a dispute over fees to proceed at the same time as

review on the merits of the case. Fed. R. Civ. P. 54, Advisory Committee Notes, 1993

Amendments, ¶ 2.

"If an appeal on the merits of the case is taken the court may rule on the claim for fees,

may defer its ruling on the motion, or may deny the motion without prejudice, directing under

subdivision (d)(2)(B) a new period for filing after the appeal has been resolved. A notice of

appeal does not extend the time for filing a fee claim based on the initial judgment, but the

court under subdivision (d)(2)(B) may effectively extend the period by permitting claims to be

filed after resolution of the appeal. A new period for filing will automatically begin if a new

judgment is entered following a reversal or remand by the appellate court or granting of rule

59 motion." Id. 

Because of the confusion created by the statutory language that attorney fee awards

under 49 U.S.C. § 14704(a)(2) shall be taxed and collected as part of the costs of the action,

the Court denies, without prejudice, the request for attorney fees filed by KPX in the Bill of

Costs submitted on March 7, 2006. A notice of appeal having been filed by Transgroup, the

Motion for Attorney fees shall be filed within 20 days of a Mandate being issued by the Ninth

Circuit Court of Appeals affirming this Court's disposition of KPX's claims. 

Accordingly,

IT IS ORDERED that the Motion for Attorney Fees filed by Transgroup (document 57)

is DENIED.

IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that the request for attorney fees included in the Bill of

Costs submitted to the Clerk of the Court on March 7, 2006, by KPX is DENIED WITHOUT

PREJUDICE.

Case 4:04-cv-00352-DCB Document 68 Filed 04/03/06 Page 4 of 5
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

- 5 -

IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that in the event a Mandate issues affirming this Court's

disposition of KPX's claims, the Motion for Attorney fees shall be filed within 20 days of the

Mandate being entered by the Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals. 

IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that a copy of this Order shall be sent to Ann Soucie,

Administrative Assistant to the Chief Deputy Clerk of the Court for the United States District

Court of Arizona.

DATED this 30th day of March, 2006.

copy to A. Soucie by cjs 3/31/06

Case 4:04-cv-00352-DCB Document 68 Filed 04/03/06 Page 5 of 5