Opinion
21-cv-2010
10-31-2024
WEICHAI AMERICA CORP. AND POWER SOLUTIONS INTERNATIONAL, INC., Plaintiffs, v. FOUAD ALI AND AURORA TECHNICAL NETWORK LLC D/B/A FLY PARTS GUY COMPANY, Defendants.
Gabriel A. Fuentes, Magistrate Judge
MOTION TO ENTER JUDGMENT
John F. Kness, Judge
Plaintiffs Weichai America Corporation and Power Solutions International, Inc. (collectively, “Plaintiffs”), by and through their undersigned counsel, bring this Motion to Enter Judgment against Defendants Fouad Ali (“Mr. Ali”) and Aurora Technical Network d/b/a Fly Parts Guy Company (“Fly Parts Guy,” together with Mr. Ali, “Defendants”) in relation to the Court's March 28, 2024, order [Doc. 71] (“Contempt Order”) granting Plaintiffs' Motion for Civil Contempt [Docs. 36-7, 69] (the “Contempt Motion”). In support hereof, Plaintiffs state as follows:
1. On October 28, 2022, Plaintiffs filed their Contempt Motion citing Defendants' violations a Consent Order and Decree (the “Consent Decree”) entered by this Court on October 21, 2021 [Doc. 33].
2. In order to uncover and prove the extent of Defendants' contempt, and largely because of Defendants' evasiveness, Plaintiffs had to issue multiple rounds of written discovery (including to third-parties), thoroughly review several document productions totaling thousands of individual pages (with many of Defendants' documents produced being products in foreign language requiring translation and extra review efforts), take the deposition of Mr. Ali, and participate in the preparation of an agreed preliminary injunction order [Doc. 49] to enjoin Defendants conduct while the Contempt Motion was pending. These efforts are described in further detail in Plaintiffs' Petition for an Award of Attorneys' Fees and Costs (the “Fee Petition”) attached as Exhibit A.
3. On March 28, 2024, the Court granted the Contempt Motion, finding that Plaintiffs showed by clear and convincing evidence that Defendants violated an unequivocal command in the Consent Decree and, therefore, Defendants were found in civil contempt.
4. In granting the Contempt Motion, the Court awarded Plaintiffs a disgorgement of Defendants' ill-gotten profits in its Contempt Order. In Defendants' written discovery responses, they represented that they accumulated $21,815.32 in net profits through their violative sales. In his deposition, Mr. Ali confirmed the accuracy of this figure. While Plaintiffs believe that there may be bases to challenge the deductions Defendants have taken in calculating their net profits, Plaintiffs accept this figure as valid for purposes of this motion and seek $21,815.32 in disgorgement from Defendants.
5. Recognizing the resources that Plaintiffs had to expend to remedy Defendants' noncompliance with the Consent Decree, the Court also ordered that Defendants reimburse Plaintiffs for the reasonable attorneys' fees and costs Plaintiff incurred in bringing the Contempt Motion. As a result of the substantial and necessary case workup und, Plaintiffs' have incurred $121,234.05 in reasonable attorneys' fees and $2,369.20 in costs in bringing the Contempt Motion.
6. On August 1, 2024, Plaintiffs' counsel provided Defendants' counsel an itemized copy of their reasonable attorneys' fees and costs incurred in bringing the Contempt Motion. To date, Defendants have not supplied Plaintiffs any specific objections to any of Plaintiffs' counsels attorneys' fees and costs. See Fee Petition, Exhibit A at Exhibit 3 (redacted detail of Plaintiffs' reasonable attorneys' fees and costs).
7. In the Contempt Order, the Court directed the parties to confer regarding both the amounts of disgorgement and Plaintiffs' fees and costs. From March 28, 2024, through present, the parties have discussed settlement to no avail. Throughout the process, Defendants have caused numerous delays by failing to meaningfully respond to Plaintiffs' settlement proposals or submit their own offers for months at a time. For example, Plaintiffs have been waiting for a revised settlement proposal from Defendants since August 19, 2024, while Defendants have repeatedly informed Plaintiffs that they would be issuing a revised offer soon.
8. The last settlement correspondence that Plaintiffs received from Defendants was on October 11, 2024, wherein Defendants' counsel represented that he would be speaking with Defendants the following week and that a revised settlement offer would be forthcoming. Plaintiffs have not heard back from Defendants since October 11, 2024, and Plaintiffs have no reason to believe that Defendants will tender a revised settlement offer any time soon.
WHEREFORE, Plaintiffs Weichai America Corporation and Power Solutions International, Inc., respectfully request that this Court enter judgment in their favor, and against Defendants Fouad Ali and Aurora Technical Network d/b/a Fly Parts Guy Company, in accordance with its March 28, 2024, Contempt Order, in the amount of $145,418.57 (consisting of $121,234.05 in attorneys' fees, $2,369.20 in costs, and $21,815.32 in disgorgement), and for such other and further relief as this Court deems necessary.
Exhibit A
PLAINTIFFS' PETITION FOR AN AWARD OF ATTORNEYS' FEES AND COSTS
Plaintiffs Weichai America Corp. and Power Solutions International, Inc. (collectively, “Plaintiffs”), by its undersigned attorneys, petition this Court for an award of attorney's fees and costs in its favor, and against Defendants Fouad Ali and Aurora Technical Network LLC d/b/a Fly Parts Guy Company (collectively, “Defendants”). This Petition is brought in relation to the Court's order, dated March 28, 2024, granting Plaintiffs motion for civil contempt against Defendants and awarding Plaintiffs' their reasonable attorneys' fees and costs. In support of this petition, Plaintiffs state and allege as follows:
INTRODUCTION
1. Plaintiffs filed their motion for civil contempt (the “Contempt Motion,” Docs. 36 37) against Defendants on October 28, 2022, asserting that Defendants violated the consent order and decree entered by this Court on October 21, 2021 (Doc. 33). As part of their Contempt Motion, Plaintiffs requested an award of all reasonable attorneys' fees and costs pursuant to Local Rule 37.1.
2. As discussed in greater detail below, and in the Declaration of Michael D. Hayes, attached hereto as Exhibit 1, after Plaintiffs filed their Contempt Motion, they engaged in substantial case workup to uncover the magnitude of Defendants' contemptuous conduct.
3. On March 28, 2024, the Court entered an order granting Plaintiffs' Contempt Motion, finding that Plaintiff presented clear and convincing evidence of contempt. (See March 28, 2024, Order, Doc. 71, attached hereto as Exhibit 2). In granting the Contempt Motion, the Court awarded Plaintiffs disgorgement damages and reasonable attorneys' fees and costs associated with bringing the Contempt Motion.
PLAINTIFFS' FEES AND COSTS
4. From approximately October 1, 2022, through July 24, 2024, Plaintiffs incurred a total of $123,603.25 in fees and costs in this case ($121,234.05 in fees and $2,369.20 in costs). These fees and costs are reflected on the Invoices.
5. Attached hereto as Exhibit 3 are copies of all legal invoices (collectively, the “Invoices”) relating to the Lawsuit generated by Plaintiffs' counsel Husch Blackwell LLP (Husch”) for its work on the Lawsuit from approximately October 1, 2022 through July 24, 2024. (See Exhibit 1 at ¶ 5). The Invoices contain the detailed information on subjects required to support a petition for attorneys' fees, including: each date on which legal services were performed; a narrative description of the work performed; the identity of the person and his/her job description (i.e., partner, associate, paralegal, etc.) performing the services; the time expended on each task; the hourly rate and total amount charged for each task; and an itemization of costs incurred. (See, Exhibit 1 at ¶ 5).
The Invoices are submitted, as is required under Illinois law, so the Court has sufficient details to review the reasonableness of the fees and costs at issue. By submitting the Invoices in connection with this Petition, Plaintiffs do not waive (and expressly preserve) all attorney-client, work product and other applicable privileges. Minor redactions have been made to a small number of the entries on the Invoices to protect privileged information. A minor redaction has been made to a single entry in the Invoices to protect privileged information because it relates to different legal matters and were included in the Invoices by mistake. The collective amount of that entry ($267.75) has been subtracted from the amount Plaintiffs seeking to recover under this Petition. (See Exhibit 1, at ¶ 6)
6. With respect to the attorneys' fees and costs incurred in this case between October 1, 2022 and July 24, 2024, Plaintiffs have approved and have paid (or are in the process of paying) Husch for these fees and costs. (Id. at ¶ 7).
7. The Husch attorneys who worked on this case are experienced and skilled in commercial litigation, performed quality legal work for Plaintiffs in this case, and achieved an outstanding result (prevailing on all case issues). (See Exhibit 1, at ¶¶ 8-9). The hourly rates Husch charged to Plaintiffs in this case are reasonable and customary in the Chicago legal market for commercial litigation cases of this complexity. (Id. at ¶ 10).
8. This case was appropriately staffed by Husch, using a mix of partners, associates, paralegals, and technical support, as warranted by the subject of the work that needed to be performed, and the experience levels and availability of the attorneys involved. Paralegal and technical support was necessary given the large number of documents, emails and other electronically stored information involved in the case. (Id. at ¶ 11).
9. The amount of costs and fees Plaintiffs seek satisfy the “lodestar” reasonableness standard used in federal courts. The amount of hours worked and billed in this case by Husch were reasonable. The case involved complicated factual and legal issues. (Id. at ¶ 12). There were several document productions made, totaling thousands of individual pages of documents, and many of the documents produced were in foreign language requiring translation and extra review efforts. (Id.). Huch had to review these documents thoroughly in preparation for taking Defendant Fouad Ali's deposition. (Id.). Plaintiffs also had to conduct substantial third-party discovery to corroborate the documents and information Defendants produced in discovery. (Id.). Plaintiffs also had to participate in the preparation of an agreed preliminary injunction order to enjoin Defendants conduct while these Contempt Proceedings remained open. All motion practice was extensive and involved complicated legal issues. (Id.). And, critically, Husch's legal work resulted in Plaintiffs prevailing on all issues and claims in the case. The costs charged ($2,369.20) were reasonable and necessarily incurred. (Id.).
10. The written discovery, document productions, document reviews, deposition, preparation of an agreed preliminary injunction order, and motion practice efforts in this case directly relate to Plaintiff's legal claim of civil contempt. (Id. at ¶ 13).
11. As noted, the Court has already awarded Plaintiffs their reasonable attorneys' fees in granting the Contempt Motion.
COMPLIANCE WITH LOCAL RULE 54.3
12. Husch provided Defendants counsel a copy of its redacted Invoices on August 1, 2024. (Id.). At the time of filing, Defendants have not supplied an itemized set of objections to the Invoices despite over a month elapsing.
13. Husch has conferred in good faith with Defendants counsel to try and reach an agreeable amount for Defendants to pay Plaintiffs for the fees and costs incurred in bringing the Contempt Motion.
14. To date, Plaintiff has not otherwise supplied a meaningful settlement offer related to the fees and costs incurred by Plaintiffs that are the subject of this Petition. No agreement has been reached on the amount of reimbursement of Plaintiffs' fees and costs.
15. At the time of filing this Petition, Defendants have not responded with specific objections to any of Plaintiffs' itemized and detailed descriptions of attorneys' fees and costs incurred.
16. Husch reserves the right to make a supplement request for fees for time spent briefing and arguing the corresponding with this Petition.
WHEREFORE, Plaintiffs Weichai America Corp. and Power Solutions International, Inc. respectfully request that this Court award Plaintiffs $123,603.25 in attorneys' fees and costs, and enter judgment in its favor, and against Defendants, in this amount.