Case 2:14-cv-00200-SWS Document 82 Filed 04/10/15 Page 1 of 5

Peter K. Michael (Wyo. Bar No. 5-2309)

Attorney General of Wyoming
Ryan T. Schelhaas (Wyo. Bar No. 6-3321)
Deputy Attorney General
Michael M. Robinson (Wyo. Bar No. 6-2658)
Senior Assistant Attorney General
Wyoming Attorney Generals Office
123 State Capitol
Cheyenne, WY 82002
(307) 777-7876
(307) 777-3687 fax

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

DISTRICT OF WYOMING
Anne Marie Guzzo and Bonnie Robinson;
Ivan Williams and Charles Killion;
Brie Barth and Shelly Montgomery;
Carl Oleson and Rob Johnston; and
Wyoming Equality,
Plaintiffs,
v.
Matthew H. Mead, in his official capacity as
the Governor of Wyoming; Dean Fausset, in
his official capacity as Director of the
Wyoming Department of Administration and
Information; Dave Urquidez, in his official
capacity as Administrator of the State of
Wyoming Human Resources Division; and
Debra K. Lathrop, in her official capacity
as Laramie County Clerk,
Defendants.

)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)

Civil No. 14-CV-200-SWS

STATE DEFENDANTS SUPPLEMENTAL

RESPONSE TO PLAINTIFFS AMENDED BILL OF COSTS

Defendants, Matthew H. Mead, Governor of the State of Wyoming, Dean Fausset, and
Dave Urquidez, in their official capacities (the State Defendants), through the Office of the
Attorney General, oppose Plaintiffs amended bill of costs filed on March 25, 2015, for the
following reasons:

Case 2:14-cv-00200-SWS Document 82 Filed 04/10/15 Page 2 of 5

Background
On February 26, 2015, Plaintiffs filed their motion for attorneys fees and costs and bill of
costs. (Docs. 69, 70, and 71.) The State Defendants filed an objection to those filings. (Doc. 72.)
The Court subsequently entered an order requiring the Plaintiffs to supplement their bill of costs
because the Plaintiffs did not provide the required itemization and documentation. (Doc. 73.)
Following the filing of Plaintiffs amended bill of costs (Doc. 78), the Court entered an order
allowing the defendants to file a supplemental response to the amended bill of costs by April 10.
(Doc. 80.) Plaintiffs original bill of costs sought recovery in the amount of $1,651.45. (Doc. 71.)
In the amended bill of costs, Plaintiffs seek costs of $828.85. (Doc. 78.)
Argument
Plaintiffs seek recovery for a filing fee, transcript costs, and copying costs. In addition to
the objections contained in the State Defendants opposition to the Plaintiffs motion for attorneys
fees and costs, the State Defendants have identified concerns with each of the three coststhe
filing fee and the transcript and copying costs.
Filing fees paid to the Clerk of Court can be recovered with proper documentation.
U.S.D.C.L.R. 54.2(f)(1). Here, however, Plaintiffs seek to recover a filing fee of $500.00 even
though

this

Courts

fee

for

civil

filings

is

$400.00.

See

http://www.wyd.uscourts.gov/htmlpages/filinginfo.html. Based upon the documentation attached

to the Plaintiffs amended bill of costs, it is unclear how Plaintiffs calculated the filing fee. (See
Doc. 78, pp. 4-5.) The documentation is simply a copy of a letter and check in the amount of
$500.00 from Arnold & Porter, LLP to Zubrod Law Office, P.C. (Id.) Plaintiffs do not attach any
receipt or other documentation to or from the Clerk of Court. Plaintiffs have not attached the

Page 2 of 5

Case 2:14-cv-00200-SWS Document 82 Filed 04/10/15 Page 3 of 5

necessary documentation for this Court to award any filing fee. If the Court allows some recovery
based upon the documentation provided, the amount should be limited to $400.00.
Next, Plaintiffs seek reimbursement of $195.50 for the preliminary injunction hearing
transcript. (Doc. 78, pp. 1, 7.) However, under Local Rule 54.2(f)(2), transcript costs are
recoverable only under four specific circumstances, none which apply in this case. U.S.D.C.L.R.
54.2(f)(2)(A)-(D). Transcript costs are allowed if: (1) the transcript is obtained for purposes of
appeal and the appeal is successful; (2) the transcript was obtained for the purposes of preparing
proposed findings of fact and conclusions of law, when directed by the Court in trials before it; (3)
the transcript is a daily transcript of trial proceedings, obtained for the convenience of counsel, for
which advance authority has been sought and obtained from the Court; or (4) the transcript is from
a deposition and it was read into evidence at trial, used to impeach a witness, refresh a witnesss
recollection, or used in support of or in opposition to any dispositive motion. Id.
The recovery of the preliminary injunction hearing transcript cost in this case is not
authorized because that cost does not fall within any of the four reasons outlined in Local Rule
54.2(f)(2). Plaintiffs did not obtain the transcript for an appeal, did not obtain the transcript for
the purpose of preparing proposed findings of fact and conclusions of law, the transcript is not a
daily transcript of a trial proceeding and, it if was, Plaintiffs did not receive advance authority from
the Court, and the transcript is not from a deposition. Accordingly, Plaintiffs request for $195.50
is not recoverable.
Last, the Plaintiffs request $133.35 in copying costs. (Doc. 78, pp. 1, 9-12.) Under Local
Rule 54.2(f)(4), copying costs are allowed only if the documents were used and admitted at trial
or made a part of the administrative record in cases involving review of an agency action.
U.S.D.C.L.R. 54.2(f)(4). If the documents were used and admitted at trial, the bill of costs must

Page 3 of 5

Case 2:14-cv-00200-SWS Document 82 Filed 04/10/15 Page 4 of 5

reference the corresponding exhibit numbers. Id. Plaintiffs should be denied recovery of their
copying costs. First, no trial was held in this matter, and this is not a case involving review of an
agency action. Second, if the preliminary injunction hearing is considered a trial, Plaintiffs
amended bill of costs fails to identify whether any of the copying costs were associated with
documents used and admitted at the preliminary injunction hearing. (Doc. 78, pp. 9-12.) Last,
Plaintiffs amended bill of costs contains no reference to corresponding exhibit numbers. (Id.)
Plaintiffs copying costs of $133.35 are not recoverable under Local Rule 54.2(f)(4).
Conclusion
Based upon Local Rule 54.2, Plaintiffs are not entitled to recover any of their costs. If the
Court allows recovery of the filing fee based upon the attached documentation, the amount should
be limited to $400.00. The other costs are not available under the rules of this Court.
Dated this 10th day of April, 2015.
OFFICE OF THE ATTORNEY GENERAL

/s/ Ryan T. Schelhaas

Peter K. Michael, (Wyo. Bar No. 5-2309)
Attorney General of Wyoming
Ryan T. Schelhaas (Wyo. Bar No. 6-3321)
Deputy Attorney General
Michael M. Robinson (Wyo. Bar No. 6-2658)
Senior Assistant Attorney General
Attorneys for State Defendants
123 State Capitol
Cheyenne, WY 82002
(307) 777-7876
(307) 777-3687 fax
pete.michael@wyo.gov
ryan.schelhaas@wyo.gov
mike.robinson@wyo.gov

Page 4 of 5

Case 2:14-cv-00200-SWS Document 82 Filed 04/10/15 Page 5 of 5

I certify that on this 10th day of April, 2015, I electronically filed the foregoing with the
CM/ECF system which sent notice to the following:
Tracy L. Zubrod
zubrod@aol.com

Thomas W. Stoever, Jr.

thomas.stoever@aporter.com

Qusair Mohamedbhai
qm@rmlawyers.com

Shannon P. Minter
Christopher F. Stoll
sminter@nclrights.org

Mark T. Voss
mvoss@laramiecounty.com

Bernard P. Haggerty
bernardh@laramiecounty.com

/s/ Ryan T. Schelhaas

Ryan T. Schelhaas

Page 5 of 5