Hickox v. Commissioner of Social Security

District Court, S.D. Illinois·Decided April 9, 2025·No. 3:24-cv-00361·Unknown

Opinion

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF ILLINOIS

LISA H., ) ) Plaintiff, ) ) vs. ) ) Case No. 24-cv-361-SMY COMMISSIONER OF SOCIAL ) SECURITY, ) ) Defendant.

MEMORANDUM AND ORDER

YANDLE, District Judge: Following entry of judgment in her favor, Plaintiff Lisa H. filed a Bill of Costs seeking $605 in costs against Defendant (Doc. 23). Defendant filed a timely objection to the Bill of Costs (Doc. 25). For the following reasons, Plaintiff’s Bill of Costs is GRANTED in part. Plaintiff seeks costs in the amount of $405 for the complaint filing fee and $200 for the pro hac vice admission fee (Doc. 23). Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 54(d)(1) provides that “[u]nless a federal statute, these rules, or a court order provides otherwise, costs—other than attorney’s fees—should be allowed to the prevailing party.” Ordinarily the Clerk of Court taxes costs in favor of the prevailing party on 14 days’ notice. Fed.R.Civ.P. 54(d)(1). Those costs may include: (1) Fees of the clerk and marshal; (2) Fees for printed and electronically recorded transcripts necessarily obtained for use in the case; (3) Fees and disbursements for printing and witnesses; (4) Fees for exemplification and the costs of making copies of any materials where the copies are necessarily obtained for use in the case; (5) Docket fees under section 1923 of this title; (6) Compensation of court appointed experts, compensation of interpreters, and salaries, fees, expenses, and costs of special interpretation services under section 1828 of this title.

28 U.S.C. § 1920. However, “pro hac vice fees are not taxable ‘costs’ under [this statute].” Canter v. AT&T Umbrella Benefit Plan No. 3, 33 F.4th 949, 959 (7th Cir. 2022). As such, only the filing fee of $405 is recoverable. Accordingly, Plaintiffs Bill of Costs (Doc. 23) is GRANTED in part; Plaintiff is awarded costs of $405.00 for the filing fee. IT IS SO ORDERED. DATED: April 9, 2025

STACI M. YANDLE United States District Judge

Page 2 of 2

Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI

Hickox v. Commissioner of Social Security, (S.D. Ill. 2025).

Hickox v. Commissioner of Social Security (Hickox v. Commissioner of Social Security) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.

Related

Craig Canter v. AT&T Umbrella Benefit Plan No.
33 F.4th 949 (Seventh Circuit, 2022)