E.D. California cuts disability access fee award, including for vague entries
Sellers v. Kaur, No. 2:23-cv-00337. District Court, E.D. California, Judge Magistrate Judge (signed order; signature block not naming judge in provided text). Decided . Read the opinion
The court applied the reductions below but did not state requested and awarded totals we could check against the opinion, so no overall percentage is shown.
Disability access · Americans with Disabilities Act · Fee applicant's counsel: Moore Law Firm, P.C.
What happened
Moore Law Firm, P.C. sought fees under the Americans with Disabilities Act in Sellers v. Kaur. The court did not state totals. It cut 1.0 attorney hour ($300) as excessive and 1.0 hour ($300) for vague entries, noting over 2 hours described only attention to preparation of the amended complaint. It reduced discovery time by 6 attorney hours ($1,800) and 2 paralegal hours ($230), and found some descriptions vague or block billed. It cut 3.5 hours ($1,050) as excessive and reduced fees-on-fees hours by 10 ($1,150) and 0.5 ($150).
What the court said
there is some vagueness in the description of tasks, as over 2 hours of attorney time includes the description of "attention to preparation" of the FAC, which does not describe a specific task.
Some of the billing descriptions are also vague, or could be considered block billing, such as two hours for continued preparation of discovery requests on 1/30/24 and 4.5 hours "preparation for deposition" on 3/26/24.
Some of the billing descriptions are also vague, or could be considered block billing, such as two hours for continued preparation of discovery requests on 1/30/24 and 4.5 hours "preparation for deposition" on 3/26/24.
The court also reduced the award for: excessive hours, excessive hours, excessive hours, excessive hours, fees on fees, fees on fees.
Why it matters
The ruling shows that courts will trim fee requests when time entries describe attention to a task without identifying it, and when entries combine multiple tasks or lack specificity. It also confirms that excessive hours and fees-on-fees work draw separate reductions, so precise, task-specific records matter.
How to keep this out of your fee petition
- Name the task, the document or person involved, and the purpose.
- Avoid stock phrases that could describe any day in any matter.
- Keep privileged detail general, but specific enough to show the work.
Cite this ruling
Sellers v. Kaur, No. 2:23-cv-00337 (E.D. Cal. Oct. 30, 2024) See hourly rates the E.D. California approves and attorney fee motions in California federal courts.
Figures and quotes are taken from the opinion and checked against its text. Spot an error? Email team@legaltime.ai with the case name and we will correct it. Summaries of public court opinions. Not legal advice.
More rulings like this
- D. Arizona cuts wage and hour fee award 5.3% over clerical work Zommick v. Lewis Construction Company LLC et al · Oct 2, 2026
- M.D. Tennessee cuts intellectual property fee award 12%, including for vague entries Livingston v. Jay Livingston Music, Inc., et al. · Sep 28, 2026
- E.D. Pennsylvania cuts wage and hour fee award 91%, including for clerical work LIN v. LEES HOUSE RESTAURANT INC et al · Sep 28, 2026