United States District Court, W.D. Virginia, Charlottesville Division
Glen E. Conrad United States District Judge.
case is presently before the court on the bill of costs filed
by the plaintiff, Concordia Pharmaceuticals, Inc.
("Concordia"), pursuant to Rule 54(d)(1) of the
Federal Rules of Civil Procedure. For the reasons that
follow, the court will award Concordia costs in the amount of
prevailed before a jury on its claim that defendants Method
Pharmaceuticals, LLC and Matthew Scott Tucker (collectively,
"Method") engaged in false advertising in violation
of the Lanham Act, 15 U.S.C. § 1125(a)(1)(B). The jury
awarded Concordia $733, 200.00 in actual or compensatory
damages. On March 2, 2017, the court granted Concordia's
motion for enhanced damages. The court exercised its
discretion to treble the jury's damages award.
See 15 U.S.C. § 1117(a).
also sought to recover its litigation costs. See Id.
(providing that a prevailing plaintiff is entitled to recover
"the costs of the action"). On March 2, 2017, the
court denied the motion for litigation costs without
prejudice, because Concordia did not request a specific
amount of costs or submit any evidence in support of the
request. Concordia was given thirty days in which to file a
bill of costs along with supporting documentation.
case is now before the court on Concordia's request for
an award of costs in the amount of $17, 007.69. The time to
respond to the bill of costs has expired, and Method has not
filed any opposition. The matter is ripe for review.
of the Applicable Law
"Under Rule 54(d)(1) of the Federal Rules of Civil
Procedure, costs 'should be allowed to the prevailing
party' unless a federal statute provides otherwise."
Williams v. Metro Life Ins. Co., 609 F.3d 622, 636
(4th Cir. 2010) (quoting Fed.R.Civ.P. 54(d)(1)). Thus, the
rule "creates the presumption that costs are to be
awarded to the prevailing party." Cherry v. Champion
Int'l Corp., 186 F.3d 442, 446 (4th Cir. 1999).
Although the court has the discretion to deny an award of
costs, it must "articulat[e] some good reason for doing
so, " in order to "overcome the presumption."
Id. (internal citation and quotation marks omitted).
particular expenses that may be taxed as costs under Rule
54(d)(1) are set forth in 28 U.S.C. § 1920. That statute
provides, in pertinent part, as follows:
or clerk of any court of the United States may tax as costs
(1) Fees of the clerk and marshal;
(2) Fees for printed or 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 ...