The Eclipse Group LLP v. Target Corporation

Good Law
United States District Court, Southern District of CaliforniaSeptember 24, 20203:15-cv-01411California3,925 words

Opinion

Trial Court Opinion

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA 10 THE ECLIPSE GROUP LLP, a California Case No.: 15-CV-1411 JLS (BLM) limited-liability partnership,

ORDER GRANTING IN PART AND

Plaintiff, DENYING IN PART DEFENDANT v. TARGET CORPORATION’S

SUPPLEMENTAL MOTION FOR

TARGET CORPORATION, et al., ATTORNEY’S FEES Defendants. 16 (ECF No. 260) 17 Presently before the Court is the Supplemental Brief on Reasonableness of Attorney’s Fees (“Supp. Br.,” ECF No. 260) filed by Defendant Target Corporation (“Target”) in response to the Court’s June 23, 2020 Order Granting in Part and Denying in Part Target’s Motion for Attorney’s Fees, ECF No. 257, as well as Intervenor Stephen M. Lobbin’s Opposition (“Opp’n,” ECF No. 261). Plaintiff The Eclipse Group LLP (“Eclipse”) did not file an opposition. The Court concludes that this matter is suitable for resolution on the papers and without oral argument pursuant to Civil Local Rule 7.1(d)(1).…

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.