United States District Court, N.D. Indiana, Hammond Division
L.H.H., a minor, by and through his mother and next friend, ESMERALDA HOLMAN HERNANDEZ, Plaintiff,
GERALD HORTON, ANGELO BRADSHAW, CITY OF GARY, INDIANA, and GARY COMMUNITY SCHOOL CORPORATION, Defendants.
OPINION AND ORDER
PAUL R. CHERRY, Magistrate Judge.
This matter is before the Court on an Affidavit in Support of Second Motion to Compel and for Sanctions [DE 62], filed on May 15, 2015. The affidavit was filed pursuant to this Court's May 8, 2015 Amended Opinion and Order. That Order denied as moot Plaintiff's Second Motion to Compel insofar as it sought to compel discovery from Defendants Horton and Gary Community School Corporation (the parties worked out a solution to the dispute after the motion was filed), but granted it insofar as it asked for an award of attorney fees and costs, as required by Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 37(a)(5)(A). The Court directed Plaintiff's attorney to file an affidavit of fees and costs by May 15, 2015, which he did, and granted Defendants until May 26, 2015, to file a response. May 26 has come and gone, and no response has been filed.
Plaintiff's attorney represents that his billing rate is $500 per hour and that he worked 2.8 hours on the underlying motion. This adds up to $1, 400 in requested fees. As explained in detail in this Court's March 10, 2015 Order, the $500-per-hour rate, though perhaps higher than average, is acceptable. See generally L.H.H. ex rel. Hernandez v. Horton, No. 2:13-CV-452-PRC, 2015 WL 1057466, at *2-*3 (N.D. Ind. Mar. 10, 2015). And the Court sees no reason to question the number of hours Plaintiff's attorney represents that he worked on the motion. Cf. id. at *3-*5 (analyzing which types of work are eligible for a fee award under Rule 37).
For these reasons, and in light of the lack of response, the Court ORDERS Defendants Horton and Gary Community School Corporation to pay Plaintiff $1, 400 ...