Awarded Costs Constrained By Federal Rules And Regional Circuit Law
Client Alert | 1 min read | 02.09.06
In Summit Technology, Inc. v. Nidek Co., Ltd. (No. 05-1292; January 26, 2006), a Federal Circuit panel modifies the district court's award of costs, remanding the case to the lower court for entry of the modified award. At issue are the constraints of § 1920 of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure dealing with taxation of specified costs, as applied under First Circuit law. The panel determines that video animations are not “exemplifications” as provided in 28 U.S.C. § 1920(4). Reviewing a variety of cases and Blacks Law Dictionary, which defines “exemplifications” as “[a]n official transcript of a public record, authenticated as true copy for use as evidence”, the panel determines that the First Circuit would adopt a narrow definition of “exemplifications” and refuse to allow recovery for video animations. The panel also reduces the lower court's award of photocopy and deposition costs as these portions of the award are not deemed properly supported by the evidentiary record.
Insights
Client Alert | 3 min read | 01.21.26
Atlantic Biologicals Opioid DPA: DOJ Continues Ramp Up of Criminal Corporate Healthcare Enforcement
On January 13, 2026, Miami-based pharmaceutical wholesaler Atlantic Biologicals Corporation entered into a two-year DPA, admitting to conspiracy to distribute and dispense controlled substances, including more than 14 million opioid doses to “pill mill” pharmacies in Texas at a markup. The DOJ and DEA underscored the company’s deliberate evasion of compliance checks and disregard for red flags signaling diversion.
Client Alert | 3 min read | 01.21.26
FedRAMP Proposes Updates to Authorization Process—Six New RFCs Released for Public Comment
Client Alert | 3 min read | 01.20.26
DoW Joins SBA’s Fight Against Alleged Pass-Through Fraud in the 8(a) Program
Client Alert | 3 min read | 01.20.26
Federal Government Challenges Minnesota Law Requiring Affirmative Action in State Government
