Bagatelos

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA 9 PETER A BAGATELOS, et al., Case No. 23-cv-02759-RS Plaintiffs, 11 v. ORDER AWARDING COSTS

UMPQUA BANK,

13 Defendant.

15 Following entry of judgment in its favor, defendant Umpqua Bank filed a timely bill of costs requesting a total amount of $22,974.59. Plaintiffs filed an objection, asserting Umpqua was not entitled to any costs because it was not a “prevailing party” under Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 54(d). Plaintiffs further argued costs should be denied in light of their allegedly limited financial resources. Plaintiffs did not otherwise challenge any of the cost items, the individual amounts, or the total claimed. The Clerk of the Court then entered an order taxing costs in the amount of $0.00, noting the claimed costs were disallowed as “outside the ambit” of the local rules. Although plaintiffs referred to Rule 54(d) as “inapplicable,” their argument actually was that there is no “prevailing party” when the rule is…