Fair Isaac Corporation v. Equifax Inc.
Filing
1076
ORDER granting in part 1057 Experian's Motion for Taxation of Costs; denying 1075 Experian's Motion for Leave to File Reply Memorandum (Written Opinion). Signed by Judge Ann D. Montgomery on 05/21/2010. (TLU)
<![CDATA[
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT DISTRICT OF MINNESOTA Fair Isaac Corporation and myFICO Consumer Services, Inc., Plaintiffs, v. Experian Information Solutions Inc.; Trans Union, LLC; VantageScore Solutions, LLC; and Does I through X, Defendants. ______________________________________________________________________________ Ronald J. Schutz, Esq., Randall Tietjen, Esq., Michael A. Collyard, Esq., and Laura E. Nelson, Esq., Robins, Kaplan, Miller & Ciresi, LLP, Minneapolis, MN, on behalf of Plaintiffs. Mark A. Jacobson, Esq., Christopher Sullivan, Esq., Lindquist & Vennum PLLP, Minneapolis, MN, and Robert A. Milne, Esq., Christopher J. Glancy, Esq., and Jack E. Pace, III, Esq., White & Case LLP, New York, NY, on behalf of Experian Information Solutions Inc. ______________________________________________________________________________ This matter is once again before the Court. On this occasion, the issue is Defendant Experian Information Solutions Inc.'s ("Experian") Motion for Review of Cost Judgment [Docket No. 1057]. In the Cost Judgment [Docket No. 1054], the Clerk of the Court denied $30,437.25 of the costs claimed by Experian. Experian insists that it is entitled to $26,976.50 of those denied costs, consisting of $24,671.25 in costs for video recording depositions; $581.25 in travel expenses for witness John Wilson, $565.06 in airfare for witness Jacob Jacoby; and $1,158.94 in copying costs for providing the Court with a second courtesy copy of the summary judgment motions granted last July. The Court upholds the Clerk's Cost Judgment, with the exception of the denied $24,671.25 in video recording costs. Recovery of costs for both stenographic transcripts and video recording is permissible, see Craftsmen Limousine, Inc. v. ORDER Civil No. 06-4112 ADM/JSM
Ford Motor Co., 579 F.3d 894, 898 (8th Cir. 2009); Little v. Mitsubishi Motors N. Am., Inc., 514 F.3d 699, 702 (7th Cir. 2008), and the Court is satisfied that, in this case, obtaining both transcripts and video recordings of the depositions was necessary. IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that: 1. Experian's Motion for Review of Cost Judgment [Docket No. 1057] is GRANTED in part; 2. The Cost Judgment [Docket No. 1054] is modified to allow an additional $24,671.25 in costs; and 3. Experian's Motion for Leave to File Reply Memorandum [Docket No. 1075] is DENIED. LET JUDGMENT BE ENTERED ACCORDINGLY. BY THE COURT:
s/Ann D. Montgomery ANN D. MONTGOMERY U.S. DISTRICT JUDGE Dated: May 21, 2010.
2
]]>
Disclaimer: Justia Dockets & Filings provides public litigation records from the federal appellate and district courts. These filings and docket sheets should not be considered findings of fact or liability, nor do they necessarily reflect the view of Justia.
Why Is My Information Online?
