UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

NORTHERN DISTRICT OF INDIANA

HAMMOND DIVISION

DESIGN BASICS, LLC, )

W.L. MARTIN HOME DESIGNS LLC, )

PLAN PROS, INC., and )

PRIME DESIGNS INC., )

)

Plaintiffs, )

)

vs. ) 2:16CV323-PPS

)

EENIGENBURG BUILDERS, INC., )

)

Defendant. )

OPINION AND ORDER

After five protracted and difficult years of litigation, the Design Basics plaintiffs

sought leave to voluntarily dismiss this case without prejudice. [DE 163.] After

considering the history of the case, defendant Eenigenburg Builders’ opposition, and

the applicable law, I dismissed the action with prejudice. [DE 165.] The matter is now

before me on Eenigenburg’s motion for costs, including attorneys’ fees, a step that I

invited in my opinion on the dismissal. [DE 166.] Despite five extensions of time, the

Design Basics plaintiffs have not filed any response to the motion. The most recent

extension to September 27, 2021 was granted sua sponte and warned that if no response

was timely filed, the motion would be taken up as unopposed. [DE 178.] 

Eenigenburg’s motion is well supported in law and fact, persuasively showing

that it is the prevailing party for purposes of an award of costs and fees under the

USDC IN/ND case 2:16-cv-00323-PPS-SLC document 180 filed 09/28/21 page 1 of 3
Copyright Act. [DE 166 at .] Applying the Fogerty1

factors, Eenigenburg demonstrates

conclusively that attorneys’ fees are appropriately awarded. [Id. at 3-4.] Design Basics’

determination to maintain the suit after the Lexington Homes decision2 meets the Fogerty

factors of frivolousness and objective unreasonableness. [Id. at 4-5; 8-9.] Design Basics’

frequently-noted “copyright troll” motive of mere profit from litigation meets the

second Fogerty factor, improper motive. [Id. at 6-8.] Imposing the substantial fee award

that is appropriate in this case advances “considerations of compensation and

deterrence,” as contemplated by the fourth Fogerty factor. [Id. at 9.] 

Eenigenburg seeks a total of $416,492.88 in fees and costs, consisting of costs of

$1,507.13, fees of $189,778.50 for counsel and paralegals at Garan Lucow Miller, and fees

of $225,207.25 for counsel and paralegals at Overhauser Law Offices. [Id. at 9; DE 166-1,

166-2, 166-3.] The fees are supported by declarations of counsel, and are reasonable

both in the hourly rates requested [DE 166-2 at 1-2; DE 166-3 at 1] and in the time

expended over the course of five years of disputatious litigation. For all these reasons,

and in view of the lack of response over more than two months’ time, the unopposed

motion is well-taken and will be granted in full.

ACCORDINGLY:

Defendant Eenigenburg Builders, Inc.’s Motion for Costs, Including Attorneys’

Fees [DE 166] is GRANTED, and Eenigenburg is awarded a total of $416,492.88 in fees

1

Fogerty v. Fantasy, Inc., 510 U.S. 517, 535 (1994).

2 Design Basics, LLC v. Lexington Homes, Inc., 858 F.3d 1093, 1105 (7th

 Cir. 2017).

2

USDC IN/ND case 2:16-cv-00323-PPS-SLC document 180 filed 09/28/21 page 2 of 3
and costs, consisting of costs of $1,507.13, fees of $189,778.50 for counsel and paralegals

at Garan Lucow Miller, and fees of $225,207.25 for counsel and paralegals at Overhauser

Law Offices. 

The Clerk shall enter a judgment of dismissal with prejudice in which the award

of fees and costs to defendant Eenigenburg Builders shall be reflected. 

SO ORDERED.

ENTERED: September 28, 2021. /s/ Philip P. Simon 

UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE

3

USDC IN/ND case 2:16-cv-00323-PPS-SLC document 180 filed 09/28/21 page 3 of 3