Opinion
Civil Case No. 09-cv-02428-PAB-KLM
04-26-2012
RONALD J. NAGIM, Plaintiff, v. EQUIFAX INFORMATION SERVICES, LLC, EXPERIAN INFORMATION SOLUTIONS, INC., and TRANS UNION, LLC, Defendants.
Judge Philip A. Brimmer
ORDER
This matter is before the Court on plaintiff's Motion to Object [Docket No. 122] and Motion to Show Cause [Docket No. 135], which the Court construes as motions to reconsider the Court's October 11, 2011 order [Docket No. 120].
In the October 11, 2011 order, the Court granted defendant Trans Union, LLC's motion for costs [Docket No. 114] pursuant to Fed. R. Civ. P. 54(d)(1). The Court noted that plaintiff had not responded to the motion and identified no reason to depart from the "presumption that the district court will award costs to the prevailing party." Cantrell v. Int'l Bhd. of Elec. Workers, 69 F.3d 456, 459 (10th Cir. 1995) (en banc). The Court further ordered the Clerk of the Court to review Trans Union's proposed bill of costs and to tax costs against plaintiff as appropriate pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1920. The Clerk of the Court taxed costs against plaintiff and in favor of Trans Union in the amount of $922.12 [Docket No. 121].
In his Motion to Object, plaintiff contends that counsel for Trans Union notified him that it would be seeking its costs but did not inform him that it would be filing a motion to that effect. Plaintiff contends that, at the time the motion was filed, he was out of the country and Trans Union failed to serve him properly. Even assuming these assertions are true, plaintiff identifies no basis that would justify denying Trans Union's request for costs. Plaintiff argues in his Motion to Show Cause that Trans Union should have been denied its costs for failing to seek them "within 14 days after entry of the judgment or final order." D.C.COLO.LCivR 54.1. Final judgment entered in favor of Trans Union on May 13, 2011, see Docket No. 106, and Trans Union filed a timely request on May 27, 2011. See Docket No. 111. The Court will therefore deny plaintiff's Motion to Show Cause.
Plaintiff informed counsel for Trans Union by email that his son signed for the certified mail delivery of the motion. See Docket No. 124-2 at 1; see also Docket No. 124-1 at 1.
Trans Union was instructed to re-file its request using the Electronic Case Filing event corresponding with the title of its filing, see Docket No. 112, which Trans Union did on May 31, 2011. See Docket No. 114; see also Docket No. 113.
--------
For the foregoing reasons, it is
ORDERED that plaintiff's Motion to Object [Docket No. 122] and Motion to Show Cause [Docket No. 135] are DENIED.
BY THE COURT:
_________________
PHILIP A. BRIMMER
United States District Judge