UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF FLORIDA

Case No. 1:20-cv-22326-KMM

JULIO RAMIREZ,

Plaintiff,

v.

SCOTTSDALE INSURANCE COMPANY,

Defendant.

 /

ORDER ON REPORT AND RECOMMENDATION

THIS CAUSE came before the Court upon Defendant Scottsdale Insurance Company’s

(“Defendant”) Verified Motion to Tax Attorney’s Fees and Costs. (“Mot.”) (ECF No. 50). 

Plaintiff Julio Ramirez (“Plaintiff”) failed to file a response. The Court referred the matter to the 

Honorable Lauren F. Louis, United States Magistrate Judge, to take “all necessary and proper 

action as required by law” with respect to Defendant’s Motion. (ECF No. 51). On November 19, 

2021, Magistrate Judge Louis issued a Report and Recommendation (“R&R”) recommending that 

Defendant’s Motion be granted in part. (ECF No. 52). No objections were filed and the time to 

do so has passed. The matter is now ripe for review.

The Court may accept, reject, or modify, in whole or in part, the findings or 

recommendations made by the magistrate judge. 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1); Fed. R. Civ. P. 72(b)(3).

Pursuant to Rule 54(d) of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure, Florida Statutes § 768.79, 

and Rule 1.442 of the Florida Rules of Civil Procedure, Defendant seeks to recover $927.00 in 

costs as the prevailing party, and $4,391.00 in attorney’s fees Defendant incurred from the date it 

served Plaintiff with an offer of judgment up to the date upon which final judgment was entered 

Case 1:20-cv-22326-KMM Document 53 Entered on FLSD Docket 01/25/2022 Page 1 of 4
2

in Defendant’s favor. Mot. at 2.

As set forth in the R&R, Magistrate Judge Louis found that (1) Defendant is entitled to 

recover its reasonable attorney’s fees incurred since February 18, 2021, pursuant to Florida 

Statutes § 768.79, R&R at 2–3, and (2) as the prevailing party, Defendant is entitled to costs

pursuant to Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 54(d)(1). Id. at 5.

As to Defendant’s request for attorney’s fees, Magistrate Judge Louis found that (1) Florida 

law governs Defendant’s entitlement to attorney’s fees, (2) Defendant’s February 18, 2021 offer 

of judgment was made in compliance with Florida law and in good faith, (3) a final judgment of 

no liability was issued in favor of Defendant, and (4) Plaintiff did not respond to Defendant’s 

Motion asserting that Defendant’s offer of judgment was otherwise invalid. Id. at 3. Thus, 

Magistrate Judge Louis found that Defendant is entitled to recover attorney’s fees. Id. Further, 

Magistrate Jude Louis found that Defendant’s counsel’s hourly billing rates were reasonable, as 

they are commensurate with those of other attorneys in the relevant market, and likewise, the time 

Defendant’s counsel expended on the tasks billed was reasonable. Id. at 4–5. Accordingly, 

Magistrate Judge Louis recommends that Defendant be awarded attorney’s fees in the amount of 

$4,391.00.1 Id. at 9.

As to Defendant’s request for costs, Magistrate Judge Louis noted that Defendant seeks to 

recover $927.00 in costs, comprising $400.00 for the filing fee for removal of the case to this Court 

1

 This sum comprises 17.3 hours of attorney and paralegal time billed from the date Defendant 

made the offer of judgment on February 18, 2021, through the date that the final judgment was 

entered in favor of Defendant on July 14, 2021. Mot. at 10–11; R&R at 4; see also (ECF Nos. 40, 

49). Of the 17.3 total hours for which Defendant seeks to recover attorney’s fees, 1.5 hours were 

billed at the rate of $250 per hour, and 15.3 hours were billed at the rate of $260 per hour, reflecting 

an increase in counsel’s hourly rate in June of 2021. R&R at 4. Further, 0.4 hours of paralegal 

time were billed at the rate of $95 per hour, resulting in 17.3 hours with fees in the amount of 

$4,391.00. Id.

Case 1:20-cv-22326-KMM Document 53 Entered on FLSD Docket 01/25/2022 Page 2 of 4
3

from the Eleventh Judicial Circuit in and for Miami-Dade County, Florida,2$102.00 for service of 

the subpoena, and $425.00 for court reporter and interpreter fees. R&R at 6; see also Mot. at 3–4. 

Magistrate Judge Louis found that the $400.00 filing fee upon removing this case is recoverable. 

R&R at 6. As to the subpoena service fee, Magistrate Judge Louis recommends that the Court 

award Defendant $65.00 for service of the subpoena upon Plaintiff, as opposed the $102.00 

Defendants requested.

3

 Id. at 7. Last, Magistrate Judge Louis recommends that $425.00 in costs 

be awarded for court reporter and interpreter fees associated with the deposition of Plaintiff and 

Plaintiff’s expert witness. Id. at 7–8. As to the deposition transcripts, Magistrate Judge Louis 

found that the depositions of Plaintiff and Plaintiff’s expert were necessary. Id. at 8. And, 

Magistrate Judge Louis noted that interpreter fees attendant to a deposition are recoverable as an 

enumerated cost under § 1920. Id.

Accordingly, Magistrate Judge Louis recommends that Defendant be awarded costs in the 

amount of $890.00, which pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1961(a), shall include post-judgment interest 

accruing from July 14, 2021 at the weekly average one-year constant maturity Treasury yield, as 

published by the Board of Governors of the Federal Reserve System, for the calendar week 

preceding the date of the July 14, 2021 final judgment in Defendant’s favor. Id.

2

 The R&R states that the instant case was removed to this court from the Fifth Judicial Circuit 

Court—this Court attributes this reference in the R&R to a scrivener’s error. R&R at 6; see also

(ECF No. 1).

3

 Specifically, Magistrate Judge Louis noted that subpoena service fees for private process servers 

are recoverable costs under § 1920. See R&R at 7 (citing U.S. E.E.O.C. v. W&O, Inc., 213 F.3d 

600, 624 (11th Cir. 2000)). However, Magistrate Judge Louis observed that Defendant provides 

only a single invoice that includes a line item for $102.00 for expedited service without information

on the time expended by Defendant’s private process server, associated travel costs, or other outof-pocket expenses. Id. Accordingly, Magistrate Judge Louis recommends that Defendant be 

awarded $65.00 for service of the subpoena, which is the maximum per hour rate for service of 

process charged by the United States Marshals Service. Id. (citing Patsalides v. City of Fort 

Pierce, No. 15-14431-CIV, 2017 WL 10402989, at *2 (S.D. Fla. Sept. 20, 2017)).

Case 1:20-cv-22326-KMM Document 53 Entered on FLSD Docket 01/25/2022 Page 3 of 4
4

This Court agrees.

Accordingly, UPON CONSIDERATION of the Motion, the R&R, the pertinent portions 

of the record, and being otherwise fully advised in the premises, it is hereby ORDERED AND 

ADJUDGED that Magistrate Judge Louis’s R&R (ECF No. 52) is ADOPTED. Consistent with 

Magistrate Judge Louis’s R&R, Defendant Scottsdale Insurance Company’s Verified Motion to 

Tax Attorney’s Fees and Costs (ECF No. 50) is GRANTED IN PART and DENIED IN PART. 

Defendant Scottsdale Insurance Company is awarded $4,391.00 in attorney’s fees, and $890.00 in 

costs plus post-judgment interest.

DONE AND ORDERED in Chambers, at Miami, Florida this ____ day of January, 2022. 

K. MICHAEL MOORE

UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE

c: All counsel of record

24th

Case 1:20-cv-22326-KMM Document 53 Entered on FLSD Docket 01/25/2022 Page 4 of 4