Keith Griego v. Otis Jackson, Jr.

Opinion

O 1

2 3 4 5 6 7 United States District Court 8 Central District of California 9 10 11 KEITH GRIEGO, Case No. 2:24-cv-03260-ODW (PVCx) 12 Plaintiff, 13 v. ORDER DENYING DEFENDANT’S MOTION FOR ATTORNEYS’ FEES 14 OTIS JACKSON, JR. et al., AND COSTS WITHOUT PREJUDICE 15 Defendants. [63] 16 17 18 Following the Court’s entry of judgment, (ECF No. 56), Plaintiff Keith Griego 19 appealed to the Ninth Circuit, (ECF No. 59). Defendants Rapp Cats LLC now moves 20 to recover their attorneys’ fees. (Mot. Att’y Fees (“Mot”), ECF No. 63.) 21 When an appeal on the merits is filed, a district court has discretion to rule on a 22 claim for fees, defer its ruling on the motion, or deny the motion without prejudice 23 and direct a new filing period for filing after the claim has been resolved. Fed. R. Civ. 24 P. 54(d)(2), Advisory Committee Notes (1993 Amendment); Dufour v. Allen, 25 No. 2:14-cv-5616 CAS (SSx), 2015 WL 12819170, at *2 (C.D. Cal. Jan. 26, 2015) 26 (“[A] district court has the discretion to defer consideration of an attorneys’ fee 27 motion until resolution of the underlying case’s appeal.”). “Particularly if the claim 28 for fees involves substantial issues or is likely to be affected by the appellate decision, 1 || the district court may prefer to defer consideration of the claim for fees until after the 2|| appeal is resolved.” Fed. R. Civ. P.58, Advisory Committee Notes (1993 3 | Amendment). “District courts have exercised their discretion to defer ruling on a 4|| motion for attorneys’ fees, or to deny the motion without prejudice to being renewed following disposition of the appeal.” Pacing Techs., LLC v. Garmin Int’l, Inc., 6 |) No. 12-cv-1067-BEN (JLB), 2014 WL 2872219, at *2 (S.D. Cal. June 24, 2014). 7 Given the nature of Plaintiff's appeal, and upon consideration of Defendant’s 8 | Motions for Attorney Fees, (ECF No. 63), the Court DENIES WITHOUT 9 || PREJUDICE Defendant’s Motion. Defendant may renew its motion within 30 days 10 || of the entry of the Ninth Circuit’s Mandate on the pending appeal. 11 12 IT IS SO ORDERED. 13 ~. 14 February 12, 2025 Ns. Ye Mth 16 OTIS DY WRIGHT, II 4 UNITED STATES DESTRICT JUDGE

18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28