Board of Trustees of the California Ironworkers Field Pension Trust v. Streamline Integration
Opinion
trial_court Opinion
10! 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 9 CENTRAL DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA 10 11 12 | BOARD OF TRUSTEES OF THE CV 21—08301-RSWL-KESx | GREIFORNAFROWTIONERS | oposR se: ORION FOR
AL ATTORNEYS’ FEES [26]
14 15 Plaintiff, 16 Vv. 17 | STREAMLINE INTEGRATION, 18 Defendant. 19 |--— 20 In accordance with the Court’s Order Granting 21 | Summary Judgment, Plaintiffs filed a Motion for 22 | Attorneys’ Fees. In the prior Order, the Court found 23 | that Plaintiffs were entitled to Attorneys’ Fees. See 241 Dkt. No. 24 at 12. The Motion is unopposed. The Court 25 | GRANTS Plaintiffs’ Motion. 26 “The most useful starting point for determining the 27 | amount of a reasonable fee is the number of hours 28
1 reasonably expended on the litigation multiplied by a
2 reasonable hourly rate,” which is known as the lodestar
3 calculation. Hensley v. Eckerhart, 461 U.S. 424, 433 4 (1983). A district court may consider any of the 5 …