Plaint i ffs -Appe1 lant s,

Transcription

1 Case: , 08/07/2015, ID: , DktEntry: 89, Page 1 of 18 UN]TED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE NINTH CIRCUIT NARANJIBHAI PATEL; et al. Plaint i ffs -Appe1 lant s, No '7 DC# CV- 05-0l-571 -DSF (A,lWx) Iconsolidat.ed w/cv o: DSF(A.TWx) and CV 04-2L92 DSF (AJWx) l \tc Central California CITY OF LOS ANGELES; et di., De f endant. s -Appel lees. SECOND SUPPLEMEI\IIIAI DECI,ARATION OF FRANK A. WEISER IN SUPPORT OF MOTION AND REQTIEST FOR TRANSFER TO DISTRICT COI]RT FOR CONSIDERATION OF ATTORNEY'S FEES OR FOR AN EXTENSION OF TIME TO FILE SUPPLEMENT TO APPELI.ANTS' MOTION FOR ATTORNEYS FEES APPEAL FROM THE T]NITED STATES DISTRICT COURT CENTRAL DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA HON. DALE S. FISCHER, Presiding FRANK A. WEISER Attorney at Law 3460 Wilshire B1vd., Suite L2L2 Los Angeles, CA (voice) - (2l-3) (f ax) - QL3) 3 B Attorney for Plaintif fs-appellants NARANJ]BHAI PATEL, RAMILABEN PATEL, and Plaint.iffs-Appelfants in consolidated cases, LOS ANGELES LODGTNG ASSOCIATION and all named individuals

2 Case: , 08/07/2015, ID: , DktEntry: 89, Page 2 of 18 DECI.,ARATION OF FRANK A. WEISER I, FRANK A. WEISER, do hereby declare: 1. f am the attorney for the lead Plaintiffs and Appellants NARANJIBHAI PATEL and PRAMILABEN PATEL and the Plaintiffs and Appellants in the consolidat.ed cases, LOS ANGELES LODGING ASSOCIATION and all named individual-s ("Appell-ants" ) (District Court Nos. CV DSF (AJWx) consolidat.ed w/cv 3610 DSF (AJWx) and CV 04 - ) 2192 DSF (A.lwx) (see ER: 44-47, 49, 70:1-l-0, 86-88; see City of Los Angeles v Patef, 516 U.S. (20L5), Slip Op. pg. 3 (Supreme Court Docket No ) ("City of Los Angefes v Pate]") ). 2. I make this second supplemental declaration in support of the motion and request for transfer of the matter of ent.itfement to attorneys fees and Lhe amount thereof regarding the litigation in Citv of Los Anqeles v Patel to the district court for consideration in consolidation wlth the issue of entitlement and amount of fees based on the hours incurred in the district court litigation in the matter pursuant to 42 U.S.C. S 1988, or in the alternatiwe, pursuanl to and Nint.h Circuit Local Rule , or an extension of to supplement this motion for attorneys fees ( "Motion" ) that was f iled on.tu1y 7, 20L5-3. My second supplemental declaration in support of the motion was filed on July L5, 2075.

3 Case: , 08/07/2015, ID: , DktEntry: 89, Page 3 of I have now compiled my since the Court issued its en banc 20L5 that includes the time spent in v Patel- case t.hat inc]udes extensive case. t.ime spent opinion on the City of on the case December 24, Los Anoeles work that I did in the 5. A detailed breakdown of my time is attached hereto as Exhibit rrarr and the total amount of t.ime as detailed in the attached timesheet. totals hours. 6. I have used an hourly rate of $ as a reasonable hourly rate based on my experience and the Decl-aration of Carol Sobel given in support of such a rate in Appellants' previous motion for attorneys fees on appeal as stated in Lhe motion at pages 2-L2, paragraphs '7. In addition, Mr. Goldstein's declaration altached as Exhibit IrArr to the motion support.s a reasonable hourly rate for work of this caliber in the Supreme Court. (See Motion, Declaration of Thomas C. Goldstein, pp. 6-L4, paragraphs Based on the hours expended and the hourly rate of $750.00, f am respectfully Gol-dst.ein & Russell-'s fees that the District requesting that in addition to Court or this Court award a fee of $317, for the work I expended on the case.

4 Case: , 08/07/2015, ID: , DktEntry: 89, Page 4 of I am also requesting $5, as reimbursement for my printing costs in filing the brief in opposition t.o the cerliorari petition and merits brief filed by the City and my trave] expenses in going to Washington, DC to help prepare for oral argument in the case. 10. f was not conpensated by my clients in working on this appeal except that the clients gave me approximately #2,900 for traveling and printing expenses in l-ate January Rather I have to expend my own resources to litigate the appeal. 11. I am st.ill await.ing breakdown of the hours and fees claimed by the Harvard Law Clinic and i respectfully request that I be permitted to supplement this motion at such time that f receive the information. I declare under penalty of perjury under the laws of the State of Cal-ifornia that the foregoing is true and correct. Executed this 7Lh day of August 20L5 at Los Angeles, California. FRANK A. WEISER

5 Case: , 08/07/2015, ID: , DktEntry: 89, Page 5 of 18 EXHIB]T IIAII

6 Case: , 08/07/2015, ID: , DktEntry: 89, Page 6 of 18 Time for Client Frank A. Weiser Naranj ibhai Patel, t al. Matter City of Los Angeles v Patel Total Fee $31_7, O62-50 Date Rate Hours Narrative Fee 3/Lo/L4 3/70/14 $7s0.00 $7s /7r/L4 $7s /26/L4 $7s /27/L4 $75o. oo 10 4/or/14 $ il< District Court Status Conference Send re: case to Professor E. Chemerinsky and review reply Send re: case to Professor E. Chemerinsky and review reply Send re: case to Professor E. Chemerinsky and review reply Call c. Orland and revi-ew from G. Orland Review from G. Orland #r,r25.00 $187. s0 $37.50 s37.s0 s7s.00 $ /02/L4 $7s B0 lnitial Review $2, of Cert Petition

7 Case: , 08/07/2015, ID: , DktEntry: 89, Page 7 of 18 Time for Frank A. Weiser Client Matter Naranjibhai Patel-, et ai. City of Los Angeles v Pate1 Date Rate Hours Narrative Fee 4/02/L4 $ Send - $ re: case to Professor E. Chemerinsky re: Cert Petition 4/ 04/L4 $ Meet.ing with #2, (with travel time) Professor E. Chemerj-nsky at UCI law school re: case 4/ 07 /74 $ work on Review of $3, of Cert Petition 4/09/L4 $ work on Review of $1, of Cert Peti-tion 4/ 09 /L4 $7s Send e-maif $ re: case to Professor E. Chemerinsky re: Cert Petition 6/30/L4 $ '75 District Court $1, (with travel time) Status Conference 7 / 03 /r4 $ Work on BrO to i2,8l2.50 Cert Petition 7 / 04/L4 $ Work on BIO to #2, Cert Petit.ion t /2I/I4 $ work on BIO to $3, Cert Petition 7/22/74 $ Work on BrO ro #'7, Cert Petition 7 /23 /I4 $ Work on BrO ro $5, Cert Petition

8 Case: , 08/07/2015, ID: , DktEntry: 89, Page 8 of 18 Time for Frank A. Weiser Client Naranjibhai Patel-, et ai. Matter City of Los Angeles v Pate1 Dat.e Rate Hours Narrative Fee 7 /24/14 $ Work on Bro to $3, Cert Petition 7 /25/L4 $ work on Bro to #2, Cert Petition 1 /27 /L4 $ Work on Bro to #4, Cert Petit.ion 8/01 /L4 $ Work on Bro to #5, Cert PetiLion B/L2/L4 $ Revj-ew Bro; send #2, t.o G. Orland B/21 /r4 $ L.25 Review of $ City Reply to BIO 9/28/L4 $7s0.00.0s $37.s0 Correspondence with Clients L0/06/L4 $7s call wirh T. $7s.00 Singh L0/L4/74 $7s0.00.0s $37. s0 Correspondence with Clients LO/T,/L4 $7s Call wirh T. $7s.00 Singh rc/r9/l4 $7s0.00.s0 Review $ Correspondence from Co-Counsel to Supreme Court

9 Case: , 08/07/2015, ID: , DktEntry: 89, Page 9 of 18 Time for Frank A. Weiser Client Naranjibhai Patel, et al. Matter City of Los Angeles v Patel- Date Rate Hours Narrative Fee L0 /20 /I4 $ Review $ between co-counsel and G. Orland L0/22/74 $ Respond to media $37s.00 requests re: cert grant I0/29/L4 $ work on $5, Respondents' Portion of Joint Appendix; call with T. Singh re: Joint Appendix LL/03/I4 $7s Work on $s, Respondentsl Portion of Joint. Appendix ri/i0/r4 $ Review district $ court transcri-pt!!/!3/t4 $7s Call wir.h T. $s62. s0 Gol-dsteln L7/30/I4 $ Work on Joint $4, Appendix; send e -mail to G. Orl-and

10 Case: , 08/07/2015, ID: , DktEntry: 89, Page 10 of 18 Time for CIient Matt.er Frank A. Weiser Naranj ibhai City of Los Patel, et a1. Angeles v Patel Date Rate Hours NarraLive Fee t2/01,/l4 $7s L2/02/74 $7s /04/L4 $7s0.00 L.75 Review en banc $1, oral argument video re:.toint Appendix t.ranscript Review - #I,t25.00 from co-counsel to G. Or]and and 9th Circuit En Banc Oral Transcript Review from G. Orland to co-counsel and 9th Circuit En Banc Oraf Transcript Rewisions $1, 3 L2.50 L2/08/T4 $7s /70/L4 $7s B0 Review from G. Orland and attached Proposed Joint Appendix Work on Joint Appendix; send to G. Orland on revision to.foint Appendix #4,L25.00 #2,850.00

11 Case: , 08/07/2015, ID: , DktEntry: 89, Page 11 of 18 Time for Client MatLer Frank A. Weiser Naranj ibhai City of Los Patel, et af. Angeles v Pate1 Date Rate Hours Narrative Fee L2/16/14 $7s L2/16/L4 $7s L2/L6/14 $7s L2/L7/14 $ L2/L8/14 $7s0.00 II.25 L2/2r/L4 $7s L2/22/L4 $7so. oo Call with T. Gol-dstein re: petit.ionersl opening brief Init.ial review of petitioners' opening brief E-Ma1l Correspondence with CIient.s Further review of petitioners' opening brief and research on response Further review of pet.it j-oners' opening brief and further research on response Review portion of amici briefs for City and research on brief E-MaiI Correspondence with Cl-ients $37s.00 $1, $37.s0 $6, $15, #4, $37.50

12 Case: , 08/07/2015, ID: , DktEntry: 89, Page 12 of 18 Time for Frank A- Weiser Cl-ient Naranj ibhai Patel-, et ai - Matter City of Los Angeles w Patel Date Rate Hours Narrative Fee 72/22/14 $7s L2/23/L4 $ L2/30/L4 $7s0.00 L.'/5 (with travel time) Review portion of amici briefs for City and research on response Review portion of amici briefs for City and research on response District Court Status Conference #4, s5, s1, 3 L2.50 ol/ oe / L5 $7s Review Motion by Solicitor Genera] to participate in oral argument $7s.00 L/L2/L5 $7s0.00 L/05/L5 $7so. oo District Court $375 Status Conference Stipulation Drafted and Sent to T. Leung Work on draf t of $4,8"/5 opposition brief r/07/74 $7s Further review of petitioners' opening brief and research on response $6,562.50

13 Case: , 08/07/2015, ID: , DktEntry: 89, Page 13 of 18 r/08/75 $ work on revised #5, draft of opposition brief L/ 09 /r5 $ work on revised $6, draft of opposition brief - second part L/L3/r5 $7s call- with T. Singh $ /L6/r5 $ Review draft from #4,r25.00 T. Singh and work on comments; cal-l wit.h T. Singh L/20/75 $ Review f rom P. Bhakt.a $22.50 L/20/7s $7s0.00.1s ro $112.s0 T. Singh L/22/75 $ Review final $1, draft of Respondentst BraeI r/23/75 $ L.'75 Review $1,3L2.50 Respondentsl Brief; discussion with H. Bhakta L/23/r5 $ s $37.s0 Correspondence with Clients L/26/L5 $75o. oo. os E-Mai1 Correspondence with Clients $37.50 r/27 /L5 $ Meering with P. $1, Bhakta and S. Patel and vari-ous clients TA. ^aoa

14 Case: , 08/07/2015, ID: , DktEntry: 89, Page 14 of 18 Time for CIient Matter Frank A. Weiser Naranj ibhai City of Los Patel, et al. Angeles v Patel Date Rate Hours Narrative Fee L/27 /rs $7s s0 Research and review slate supreme court case re: motel registry law and privacy issue in rel-at.ion to case $2, L/2e/15 $7s0. oo 4.70 Review portion of amici briefs for clienls $3, r/30/1,5 $7s L/30/75 $7s r/31"/15 $7s L/3L/15 $7s Correspondence with Clients Send to Grace Chan of Rutherford Inst itute Send e-maif to Chirag Shah counsel for AAHOA Send to clients $112. s0 $rs.00 $37.s0 $37. s0 2/or/$ $7so. o Review portion #4,r25.00 of amici briefs for clients

15 Case: , 08/07/2015, ID: , DktEntry: 89, Page 15 of 18 Time for CIient Matter Frank A. Weiser Naranj ibhai City of Los Patel, t ai. Angeles v Patel Date Rate Hours Narrative Fee 2/02/L5 $7s Review portion of amici briefs for clients $4, /03/75 $7s /04/15 s s 2/05/$ $ L.25 2/05/15 $7s /oe/15 $7s /l.0/$ $ UJ Review port.ion of amici briefs for cl-ients Review portion of amici briefs for clients Review portion of amici briefs for clients Correspondence with Client.s Call with cocounsel- and clients re: oraf argument Review from T. Singh s4,3l2.50 s3, $937. s0 $37. s0 $37s.00 # /12/15 $7s with Cl-1ents $ /13/Ls $ E-MaiI #22.50 with T. Singh 10

16 Case: , 08/07/2015, ID: , DktEntry: 89, Page 16 of 18 Time for Frank A. Weiser Client Matter Naranjibhai Patel, et al. City of Los Angeles v Pate1 Date Rate Hours Narratiwe Fee 2/15/t5 $750. oo 5. oo Prepare for $4, moot court 1n L.A. ; review briefs and Joint Appendix and cases 2/:-6/15 $75o.oo 5.00 Prepare for $3, moot court in L.A. ; review briefs and.toint Appendix and cases 2/L7 /t5 $750. oo 4. oo Prepare for and $3,l conduct moot court in L.A. 2/t1 /L5 $750. oo.15 Review $ from T. Singh and review statement of costs sent from opposing counsel to cocounsel as at.tached to e-maii 2/LB/L5 $7s0.oo.03 Review #22.50 from K. Russell 2/rc/$ $?50. oo.03 Review #22 -s0 USCLC Moot Court 2/te/!s $7s0.00.0s E-MaiI with clients 2/23/ts $7s with Clients $37. s0 fi

17 Case: , 08/07/2015, ID: , DktEntry: 89, Page 17 of 18 Time for Client Matter Frank A. Weiser Naranj ibhai Patel, et al. City of Los Angeles w Pate1 Date Rate Hours Narratiwe Fee 2/24/15 $7s /26/Ls $7s /26/Ls- 3/03/ts $7s /0s/L5 $7so. oo.05 s/l2/l5 $7s Review from P. Bhakta Discussion wit,h B. Patel re: case $187. s0 $37s.00 Travel- to Washington, $82,500 D.C. to attend moot courts, assist cocounsel in preparation of oral argument E-Mai1 with Cl-i-ent.s Respond to media request $37. s0 $ /22/t5 $3, $7s Rewiew U. S. Supreme Court Opinion in case and respond to media requests and meeting and discussion about case with some of clients TOTAIJ HOURS L2

18 Case: , 08/07/2015, ID: , DktEntry: 89, Page 18 of 18 9th Circuit Case Number(s) n.{}-:f i,.-...r,. ':rlr'1r,1.1..,it.,t.,','1-1..r1,,1:',1i,...' ' 't 1 " "i" r'..,.'. '.,,. {<{<****d<{<***{<**{<**********<tr***:l<>f>k'k********{<{<:l<***{<*{<>f*****{<*{<*****r,<**<****{<***{<:ft<{<{<* CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE When All Case Participants are Registered for the Appellate CM/ECF System I hereby certiff that I electronically filed the foregoing with the Clerk of the Court for the United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit by using the appellate CM/ECF system on (date) ugust 7,2015 I certifo that all participants in the case are registered C\iVECF users and that service will be accomplished by the appellate CMIECF system. Signature (use "s/" format) s/ Frank A. Weiser - Attorney for Plaintiffs and Appellants **{<>F{<>F**)k:{<:&***:F{<*{<{<,&{<{<****:F**X<{<***********{<i<****<{<****{<*{<****************{<{<{<{<tr<*trtF'& CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE When Not All Case Participants are Registered for the Appellate CM/ECF System I hereby certifl/ that I electronically filed the foregoing with the Clerk of the Court for the United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit by using the appellate CM/ECF system on (date) Participants in the case who are registered CM/ECF users will be served by the appellate CM/ECF system. I further certi$r that some of the participants in the case are not registered CMIECF users. I have mailed the foregoing document by First-Class Mail, postage prepaid, or have dispatched it to a third party commercial carrier for delivery within 3 calendar days to the following non-ciwecf participants : Signature (use "s/" format)