Opinion
Civil Action 3:22-CV-1825-X
08-16-2023
ROMACK RESOURCE SOLUTIONS, LTD., Plaintiff, v. ADVANCED TECHNOLOGY INNOVATIONS, LLC, Defendant.
MEMORANDUM OPINION AND ORDER
BRANTLEY STARR UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE
Plaintiff Romack Resource Solutions, Ltd. (“Romack”) sued Defendant Advanced Technology Innovations, LLC (“Advanced Technology”) for breach of their Professional Services Agreement. [Doc. 6 at 1]. The Court previously granted Romack's motion for default judgment but rejected Romack's request for “$12,792.50 in attorney's fees” because Romack's attached affidavit failed to “specif[y] where th[at] amount[] came from.” But the Court let Romack try again, requiring Romack to file a motion to attorney fees with a declaration “showing the hourly rate, hours worked, what the work was for, and how the hourly rate and hours worked were reasonable given the context of the case.”
Doc. 13 at 5.
Id. at 5.
Before the Court is Romack's second bite at the apple. [Doc. 15]. Romack now seeks $11,410 in attorney fees and provides a one-page declaration of Marta Milan. The declaration says that Cuccia Wilson Sanderson, PLLC “spent 39.3 hours prosecuting this case.” But that's about it. Beyond that, it alleges in conclusory fashion only that (1) “[t]he fees were reasonable for the services performed,” and (2) “[t]he fees charged are those customarily charged in this area for the same or similar services.” Once again, the Court has no idea “where th[at] amount[] came from.” The Court doesn't know which attorneys worked on the case, the attorneys' experience levels, the attorneys' hourly rates, the tasks performed, or the hours spent on each task. Romack's failure to provide that information hobbles the necessary reasonableness determination that the Court must conduct.
Doc. 15-1 at 1.
Id. The motion itself says that the hourly rates were $375 for partners and $305 for associates. But that's not in a declaration format, and it doesn't specify which attorneys charged those rates.
Doc. 13 at 5.
A time-keeping log often helps in that assessment.
Accordingly, the Court DENIES Romack's motion for attorney fees. [Doc. 15]. Romack may file a new motion to recover attorney fees by September 6, 2023 providing the information specified above. The Court warns Romack that this will be its last opportunity to request attorney fees.
IT IS SO ORDERED