(Total Views: 304)
Posted On: 01/12/2018 7:07:21 PM
Post# of 82686
Re: Splithappens #14739
Split, first thanks for the link to the Bill of Costs Handbook.
"The appeal will hopefully put costs off. "
Where do you see it mentions on deferring the cost payment until appeals conclude? I don't see it.
Remember RG asked for it in their objection but the court didn't grant it and just issued the final judgment.
III.STRIKEFORCE’S OBJECTION’S TO SECUREAUTH’S PROPOSED FINAL JUDGMENT StrikeForce respectfully objects to SecureAuth’s proposed final judgment in its entirety because StrikeForce believes the Court’s decision is incorrect, and will be appealing that decision to the Federal Circuit. Given the Court’s order, however, StrikeForce specifically objects to paragraph 3 of the Proposed Final Judgment: 3. SecureAuth is the prevailing party for the purpose of recovering costs under Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 54(d) and 28 U.S.C. § 1920 in an amount to be determined and subject to documentation and verification. SecureAuth may serve and file a bill of costs incurred in this action in accordance with Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 54(d) and Civil Local Rule 54. StrikeForce objects to this language because costs are not addressed by the Court’s judgment in this matter and are not addressed by the Court’s Order granting SecureAuth’s Motion to Dismiss. Therefore, any motion by SecureAuth for costs should be addressed separately, after resolution of StrikeForce’s impending appeal.
"The appeal will hopefully put costs off. "
Where do you see it mentions on deferring the cost payment until appeals conclude? I don't see it.
Remember RG asked for it in their objection but the court didn't grant it and just issued the final judgment.
III.STRIKEFORCE’S OBJECTION’S TO SECUREAUTH’S PROPOSED FINAL JUDGMENT StrikeForce respectfully objects to SecureAuth’s proposed final judgment in its entirety because StrikeForce believes the Court’s decision is incorrect, and will be appealing that decision to the Federal Circuit. Given the Court’s order, however, StrikeForce specifically objects to paragraph 3 of the Proposed Final Judgment: 3. SecureAuth is the prevailing party for the purpose of recovering costs under Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 54(d) and 28 U.S.C. § 1920 in an amount to be determined and subject to documentation and verification. SecureAuth may serve and file a bill of costs incurred in this action in accordance with Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 54(d) and Civil Local Rule 54. StrikeForce objects to this language because costs are not addressed by the Court’s judgment in this matter and are not addressed by the Court’s Order granting SecureAuth’s Motion to Dismiss. Therefore, any motion by SecureAuth for costs should be addressed separately, after resolution of StrikeForce’s impending appeal.
(0)
(0)
