United States District Court, D. Minnesota
R. Kroll, Esq., Robert R. Weinstine, Esq., Justice Ericson
Lindell, Esq., and Brent Lorentz, Esq., Winthrop &
Weinstine, PA, Minneapolis, MN, on behalf of Plaintiff.
Felicia J. Boyd, Esq., Barnes & Thornburg LLP,
Minneapolis, MN; David B. Hamilton, Esq., Barry J. Herman,
Esq., and Victoria Ann Bruno, Esq., Womble Bond Dickinson
(US) LLP, Baltimore, MD; Jason C. Hicks, Esq., and Amanda
Norris Ames, Esq., Womble Bond Dickinson (US) LLP,
Washington, D.C.; John G. Berry, Esq., Womble Bond Dickinson
(US) LLP, Atlanta, GA; and Brent F. Powell, Esq., Womble Bond
Dickinson (US) LLP, Winston Salem, NC, on behalf of
MEMORANDUM OPINION AND ORDER
MONTGOMERY U.S. DISTRICT JUDGE
matter is before the undersigned United States District Judge
for a ruling on Defendant Graphic Packaging, LLC's
(“Graphic”) Motion for Review of Cost Judgment
[Docket No. 1066] and by Plaintiff Inline Packaging,
LLC's (“Inline”) Motion for Review of Cost
Judgment [Docket No. 1068]. For the reasons stated below,
Graphic's Motion is denied and Inline's Motion is
granted in part and denied in part.
2015, Inline filed this lawsuit against Graphic alleging
antitrust violations, tortious interference, and
misappropriation of trade secrets. See Compl.
[Docket No. 1]. In September 2018, this Court issued a
Memorandum Opinion and Order [Docket No. 1035] granting
summary judgment to Graphic on all claims and entered
Judgment [Docket No. 1037] in favor of Graphic. Inline has
filed a Notice of Appeal [Docket No. 1040].
October 5, 2018, Graphic filed a Bill of Costs [Docket No.
1039] seeking $304, 930.89 as reimbursement for: (1) Clerk
fees ($800); (2) fees for transcripts necessarily obtained
for use in the case ($64, 159.41); (3) fees for witnesses
($12, 751.70); and (4) fees for the costs of making copies
necessarily obtained for use in the case ($227, 219.78).
Inline filed an Objection [Docket No. 1053] to Graphic's
Bill of Costs on October 19, 2018.
2, 2019, the Clerk of Court entered a Cost Judgment [Docket
No. 1065] awarding Graphic $47, 767.90 in costs. The Cost
Judgment includes Clerk fees of $800 for the pro hac vice
fees of Graphic's counsel; transcript fees of $35,
238.95; witness fees of $10, 646.10 (including witness travel
costs); and copy fees of $1, 082.85. See Cost
Judgment at 1. The Clerk denied $226, 137.53 in e-discovery
related costs that Graphic claimed as fees for the cost of
making copies. Taxation Costs Summary [Docket No. 1065,
Attach. 1] at 7. The Clerk's stated reason for denying
these costs was that “E-Discovery costs . . . are not
taxable by the clerk.” Id.
now seeks review of the Clerk's decision not to award
electronic discovery expenses to Graphic. Inline seeks review
of the Clerk's decision to award Graphic its witness
travel costs and pro hac vice fees.
Rule of Civil Procedure 54(d)(1) provides in relevant part:
“Unless a federal statute, these rules, or a court
order provides otherwise, costs-other than attorney's
fees-should be allowed to the prevailing party.” A cost
award must, however, fit within the categories of taxable
costs enumerated in 28 U.S.C. § 1920. Little Rock
Cardiology Clinic PA v. Baptist Health, 591 F.3d 591,
601 (8th Cir. 2009). Section 1920 permits taxation of the
following categories of costs:
(1) Fees of the clerk and marshal;
(2) Fees for printed or electronically recorded transcripts
necessarily obtained for use in the case;
(3) Fees and disbursements for printing and witnesses;
(4) Fees for exemplification and the costs of making copies
of any materials where the copies are necessarily obtained
for use in the case;
(5) Docket fees under section 1923 of this title; [and]
(6) Compensation of court appointed experts, compensation of
interpreters, and salaries, fees, expenses, and costs of
special interpretation services ...