Magistrate Judge Hightower passed on the plaintiff’s motion in support of its bill of costs following its $175 million verdict against Meta (fka Facebook) and recommended an award of $138,004.95 instead of the requested $229,042.35.
Judge Mazzant granted the application for fees and costs only in part, finding the request inadequately supported as fees. Accordingly, the prevailing plaintiff only recovered its costs.
Judge Mazzant denied the defendants’ attempts to set aside the jury’s verdict in this trademark/RICO case, and directed the parties to bear their own costs of court.
A couple of court costs orders issued from Marshall this morning, and I thought they provided some useful examples of fairly routine court costs post-verdict.
At the recent hearing on postverdict motions in this case, Judge Albright passed on the defendant’s renewed motion for judgment as a matter of law and motion for new trial, as well as its motion regarding equitable estoppel. He also considered the plaintiff’s amended bill of costs, motion to amend the judgment to include supplemental damages and interest, and motion for enhanced damages. Labcorp’s motion to amend the judgment and for additional relief on its claim of equitable estoppel was denied – the rest will be the subject of a forthcoming order.
The standard for trial graphics/support expenses as costs has changed – dramatically – in Waco.
Having some patent trials in Waco means we’re starting to get rulings on some postverdict motions, like, as here, court costs.
This finding followed a default judgment, but provides useful analysis.
For one thing, the amount. For another, the language regarding a stay.
As is often the case, the dispute involves the recoverability of deposition costs.
