United States District Court, D. Delaware
C. Schoell, DRINKER BIDDLE & REATH LLP, Wilmington, DE
Wilson M. Brown, III, DRINKER BIDDLE & REATH LLP,
Philadelphia, PA Patrick J. Kelleher, DRINKER BIDDLE &
REATH LLP, Chicago, IL Attorneys for Plaintiff.
D. Taylor, SAUL EWING ARNSTEIN & LEHR LLP, Wilmington, DE
Michael J. Lennon and Georg C. Reitboeck, ANDREWS KURTH
KENYON LLP, New York, NY Susan A. Smith, ANDREWS KURTH KENYON
LLP, Washington, DC Attorneys for Defendant Volkswagen Group
of America, Inc.
U.S. DISTRICT JUDGE
2010, Plaintiff Cloud Farm Associates LP ("Plaintiff or
"Cloud Farm") filed this patent infringement action
against two defendants, including Volkswagen Group of America
Inc. ("Defendant" or "Volkswagen"). (D.I.
1) On July 27, 2012, the Court issued a first Claim
Construction Opinion and Order. (D.I. 163, 164) On August 10,
2015, the Court issued a second Claim Construction Opinion
and Order. (D.I. 340, 341) On October 21, 2015, the parties
requested a stay of the proceedings, having jointly concluded
that "the issues to be prosecuted and tried in light of
the Court's claim construction rulings" made it
appropriate "to submit a stipulation of non-infringement
and invalidity concerning the patents in suit, together with
a proposed final order and judgment for the Court's
consideration, reserving the parties' rights to appeal
the Court's holdings on claim construction." (D.I.
345) On December 4, 2015, the parties submitted a Joint
Stipulation of Non-Infringement and Invalidity and proposed
Final Judgment. (D.I. 349) The Court entered Final Judgment
on December 8, 2015. (D.I. 350)
April 17, 2016, Volkswagen filed a Bill of Costs, supported
by a Declaration of Georg Reitboeck, with the Clerk of Court.
(D.I. 355) Cloud Farm objected to the Bill of Costs on May 1,
2017. (D.I. 356) The Clerk entered its Taxation of Costs on
January 10, 2018. (D.I. 357)
before the Court is Volkswagen's Motion for Review of
Clerk's Taxation of Costs. (D.I. 358) Specifically,
Volkswagen requests review of the Clerk's denial of
$931.74 for hearing transcripts and $20, 423.49 for
deposition transcripts. (D.I. 357 at 2-3; D.I. 358 at 1) The
motion is fully briefed. (See D.I. 358, 359, 360)
For the reasons set forth below, the Court will grant
Rule of Civil Procedure 54(d) gives courts the discretion to
award costs to prevailing parties." Taniguchi v.
Kan.Pac. Saipan, Ltd., 566 U.S. 560, 565 (2012). In
particular, Rule 54(d)(1) provides: "Unless a federal
statute, these rules, or a court order provides otherwise,
costs - other than attorney's fees - should be allowed to
the prevailing party." Fed.R.Civ.P. 54(d)(1). As the
Third Circuit has observed, Rule 54(d)(1) "uses the word
'costs' as a term of art, rather than to refer to all
expenses a prevailing party may incur in a given
action." In re Paoli R.R. Yard PCB Litig., 221
F.3d 449, 458 (3d Cir. 2000).
categories of costs that are taxable are established by
statute: 28 U.S.C. § 1920, a statute to which the
Supreme Court "has accorded a narrow reading."
Race Tires Am., Inc. v. Hoosier Racing Tire
Corp., 674 F.3d 158, 171 (3d Cir. 2012) (citing
Crawford Fitting Co. v. J.T. Gibbons Inc., 482 U.S.
437, 442 (1987)). Section 1920 states, in full:
A judge or clerk of any court of the United States may tax as
costs the following:
(1) Fees of the clerk and marshal;
(2) Fees for printed or electronically recorded transcripts
necessarily obtained ...