Document ID: s3://data.kl3m.ai/documents/govinfo/USCOURTS/USCOURTS-ca10-12-03213/USCOURTS-ca10-12-03213-0/pdf.json

Parties Involved:
Garmin International, Inc.
Appellee
Alex Huaqiang Leo
Appellant

Document Text:

UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS 

 TENTH CIRCUIT

ALEX HUAQIANG LEO,

 Plaintiff - Appellant,

v.

GARMIN INTERNATIONAL, INC.,

Defendant - Appellee.

No. 12-3213

(D.C. No. 2:09-CV-02139-KHV)

(D. Kan.)

ORDER AND JUDGMENT*

Before HARTZ, MURPHY, and EBEL, Circuit Judges. 

 

 In a previous appeal, this court, acting pursuant to Fed. R. App. P. 38, ordered 

Plaintiff-Appellant Alex Huaqiang Leo to pay Defendant-Appellee Garmin International, 

Inc. (“Garmin”) reasonable appellate attorney’s fees as a sanction for pursuing a frivolous 

appeal. Leo v. Garmin Int’l, Inc., 464 F. App’x 744, 745-46 (10th Cir. 2012) 

(unpublished). This court then remanded the case to the district court to determine 

“reasonable attorney’s fees.” Id. at 746. On remand, the district court awarded Garmin 

 

*After examining the briefs and appellate record, this panel has determined 

unanimously that oral argument would not materially assist the determination of this 

appeal. See Fed. R. App. P. 34(a)(2) and 10th Cir. R. 34.1(G). The case is therefore 

ordered submitted without oral argument. This order and judgment is not binding 

precedent, except under the doctrines of law of the case, res judicata, and collateral 

estoppel. It may be cited, however, for its persuasive value consistent with Fed. R. App. 

P. 32.1 and 10th Cir. R. 32.1. 

FILED 

United States Court of Appeals 

Tenth Circuit 

January 2, 2013

Elisabeth A. Shumaker 

Clerk of Court

Appellate Case: 12-3213 Document: 01018975793 Date Filed: 01/02/2013 Page: 1 
2 

fees in the amount of $12,710.90. Leo appeals from that determination. 

This court reviews the district court’s determination of the amount of attorney’s 

fees to be awarded for an abuse of discretion. Cf. Centennial Archaeology, Inc. v. 

AECOM, Inc., 688 F.3d 673, 678 (10th Cir. 2012) (reviewing amount of fees imposed as 

a sanction for discovery misconduct). On appeal, Leo does not argue that the district 

court abused its discretion in determining the amount of the fee award. And this court’s 

own independent review of the fee award does not reveal any abuse of discretion. 

Therefore, we AFFIRM the district court’s decision to award Garmin $12,710.90 in 

attorneys’ fees. 

ENTERED FOR THE COURT 

David M. Ebel 

Circuit Judge 

Appellate Case: 12-3213 Document: 01018975793 Date Filed: 01/02/2013 Page: 2