Gracie

Gracie v. Gracie

Good Law
157 F. App'x 967
United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth CircuitNovember 14, 2005No. 04-15014; D.C. No. CV-94-04156-SCCalifornia360 words

Opinion

Lead Opinion

MEMORANDUM **

The issue of attorneys’ fees in this case is before us for the third time. On remand from our second decision, Gracie v. Semaphore Entm’t Group, 52 Fed.Appx. 43 (9th *969 Cir.2002) (“Grade II”), the district court awarded Appellees $462,442.46 in attorneys’ fees and costs. Reviewing the award of attorneys’ fees for abuse of discretion, Horphag Research Ltd. v. Pellegrini, 337 F.3d 1036, 1042 (9th Cir.2003), we affirm in part and refer the remaining issues to the Ninth Circuit Settlement Unit.

The district court did not abuse its discretion in finding that Appellants’ Lanham Act Claims and non-Lanham Act claims were inextricably intertwined such that apportionment of fees is impossible. In accordance with our instructions in Grade II, the district court properly considered whether the factual and legal bases of each non-Lanham Act claim were substantially identical to those of the Lanham Act claims as part of its analysis.

The district court did not abuse its discretion in making a 10% reduction of the total fee award to account for Appellants’ successful defense against Appellees’ trademark infringement counterclaim. As directed by this court in Grade II, the…

Sign in to read the full opinion

Create a free account to read the complete opinion text, citation history, and good-law status for this case.