IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 

FOR THE MIDDLE DISTRICT OF PENNSYLVANIA 

 

AMERICAN BUILDERS & 

CONTRACTORS SUPPLY CO., INC., 

 Plaintiff, 

 v. 

MASON RAY CONSTRUCTION 

LLC, et al., 

 Defendants. 

 No. 4:23-CV-01982 

 (Chief Judge Brann) 

 

 

MEMORANDUM OPINION AND ORDER 

DECEMBER 11, 2024 

I. BACKGROUND 

On November 13, 2024, the Court partially granted Plaintiff American 

Builders & Contractors Supply Co., Inc.’s (“ABC”) Motion to Compel Discovery. 

But I determined that it was premature to award ABC attorney’s fees under Federal 

Rule of Civil Procedure 37(b) as there was no discovery order in effect at that time. 

However, I noted that ABC would be entitled to recover its expenses under Rule 

37(a) after I provided Defendants Kyle S. Ditty and Mason Ray Construction, LLC 

with the required opportunity to be heard. The Court set a deadline of November 27, 

2024 for the Defendants to file a responsive brief but received no response. 

Case 4:23-cv-01982-MWB Document 20 Filed 12/11/24 Page 1 of 5
2 

II. DISCUSSION 

A. Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 37 

Rule 37(a)(5) states that “[i]f the motion [to compel] is granted ... the court 

must, after giving an opportunity to be heard, require the party ... whose conduct 

necessitated the motion, the party or attorney advising that conduct, or both to pay 

the movant’s reasonable expenses incurred in making the motion, including 

attorney’s fees.” But the Court shall not grant these expenses if: (1) “the movant 

filed the motion before attempting in good faith to obtain the ... discovery without 

court action;” (2) “the opposing party’s nondisclosure, response, or objection was 

substantially justified;” or (3) “other circumstances make an award of expenses 

unjust.” 

I provided the Defendants with the required opportunity to be heard, but the 

Court received no response. In the face of this continued silence, I am forced to 

conclude that the Defendants’ failure to comply with the Plaintiff’s discovery 

requests is not “substantially justified” and that there are no “other circumstances 

[that] make an award of expenses unjust.” Consequently, I will award ABC the 

expenses it incurred “in making” this Motion to Compel. 

Case 4:23-cv-01982-MWB Document 20 Filed 12/11/24 Page 2 of 5
3 

B. An Award of Attorney’s Fees and Other Expenses 

The Supreme Court of the United States has directed that I use the lodestar 

method when determining a reasonable attorney’s fee.1

 “Under the lodestar method, 

an[] attorney’s reasonable hourly rate is multiplied by the number of hours the 

attorney reasonably spent working on a matter.”2

 “Once the court determines the 

reasonable hourly rate, it multiplies that rate by the reasonable hours expended to 

obtain the lodestar.”3

 “The lodestar is presumed to be the reasonable fee.”4 When 

evaluating the reasonableness of an attorney’s hourly rate, I look to the vicinage in 

which the Court sits as the relevant community.5

 “Hours are not reasonably 

expended if they are excessive, redundant, or otherwise unnecessary.”6

1. A Reasonable Hourly Rate 

ABC has requested $1,821.21 in expenses, representing $1,770.00 in 

attorney’s fees7

 and $51.21 in expenses.8 ABC’s attorney, Scott Bernstein, notes that 

his hourly rate is $300, and his paralegal’s hourly rate is $90. Although ABC fails 

1

 Perdue v. Kenny A. ex rel. Winn, 559 U.S. 542, 551 (2010). 

2

 D.O. ex rel. M.O. v. Jackson Twp. Bd. of Educ., No. CV 17-1581 (TJB), 2019 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 

72875, 2019 WL 1923388, at *2 (D.N.J. Apr. 30, 2019). 

3

 Rode v. Dellarciprete, 892 F.2d 1177, 1183 (3d Cir. 1990). 

4

 Id.

5

 Interfaith Community Organization v. Honeywell Intern, Inc., 426 F.3d 694, 699 (3d Cir. 

2005). 

6

 Rode, 892 F.2d at 1183. 

7

 ABC’s declaration contains a typographical error. The documentation submitted in Exhibit 2 

indicates that $1,770.00 in attorney’s fees were incurred, not $1,771.00. Doc. 19 (Bernstein 

Decl.), Ex. 2 (Expense Report). 

8

 Doc. 19 (Bernstein Decl.) ¶6. 

Case 4:23-cv-01982-MWB Document 20 Filed 12/11/24 Page 3 of 5
4 

to attach any additional affidavits from other attorneys in this vicinage, I conclude 

that $300 per hour is a reasonable rate for the work performed.9

 Mr. Bernstein has 

over twenty years of experience; he also clerked for a United States Bankruptcy 

Judge in the United States District Court for the Southern District of New York.10

Mr. Bernstein has also specialized in this exact kind of suit.11 While no information 

is provided regarding Mr. Bernstein’s paralegal, other cases in this District have 

established a range of $75 to $170 per hour for paralegals depending on their 

experience and the complexity of the work performed.12 Given this motion was not 

complex, I conclude that $90 an hour is a reasonable rate. 

2. Reasonable Hours and Expenses 

Next, I turn to the reasonableness of the hours requested. ABC has met its 

burden by producing timesheets with sufficiently detailed descriptions of the hours 

spent. After reviewing the time entries, I conclude that the time spent was 

reasonable. I also examined the requested expenses documented in the timesheets. 

9

 Attorneys in this District were regularly awarded rates from $100 to $375 from 2019 to 2024 

depending on their skill and experience and the complexity of the case. E.g., A.B. v. Pleasant 

Valley Sch. Dist., No. 3:17-CV-02311, 2019 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 108469 (M.D. Pa. June 28, 

2019); Katona v. Asure, No. 1:11-CV-1817, 2019 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 24062 (M.D. Pa. Feb. 14, 

2019); Finnegan v. Smith, No. 3:16-CV-1416, 2019 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 35114 (M.D. Pa. Mar. 

5, 2019) and Beard v. Ocwen Loan Servs., LLC, No. 1:14-CV-01162, 2024 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 

4753 (M.D. Pa. Jan. 9, 2024). 

10 Id. ¶ 7. 

11 Id. 12 E.g., A.B. v. Pleasant Valley Sch. Dist., No. 3:17-CV-02311, 2019 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 108469 

(M.D. Pa. June 28, 2019). 

Case 4:23-cv-01982-MWB Document 20 Filed 12/11/24 Page 4 of 5
5 

Those are similarly reasonable. As such, I will award ABC the entirety of its 

requested attorney’s fees and expenses. 

III. CONCLUSION 

ABC has met its burden regarding the reasonableness of its requested hourly 

rates, hours, and expenses. In accordance with the above, IT IS HEREBY 

ORDERED that: 

1. Plaintiff American Builders & Contractors Supply Co., Inc. is 

awarded the expenses and attorney’s fees it incurred when 

making its Motion to Compel Discovery (Doc. 15). 

2. Defendants Kyle S. Ditty and Mason Ray Construction, LLC 

shall pay to Plaintiff a sum of $1,821.21. This amount 

represents $1,770.00 in attorney’s fees and $51.21 in expenses. 

3. Defendants shall pay the awarded expenses and attorney’s fees 

within twenty-one (21) days of the date of this Memorandum 

Opinion and Order. 

 BY THE COURT: 

s/ Matthew W. Brann 

 Matthew W. Brann 

 Chief United States District Judge 

Case 4:23-cv-01982-MWB Document 20 Filed 12/11/24 Page 5 of 5