UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF NEW YORK
February 4, 2011
T. PATRICK FREYDL,
PLAINTIFF, JOHN C. MERINGOLO, MERINGOLO & ASSOCIATES, P.C., A NEW YORK PROFESSIONAL SERVICE CORPORATION, DEFENDANTS.
The opinion of the court was delivered by: Kevin Nathaniel Fox United States Magistrate Judge
MEMORANDUM AND ORDER
By an order, dated January 7, 2011, the Court denied the defendants' motion for a protective order and found that the plaintiff is entitled to the reasonable expenses incurred in opposing the motion, pursuant to the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure. Before the Court is the plaintiff's unopposed *fn1 application for reasonable expenses. He seeks: (a) $17.50 for parking fees, because he conducted research in a public library, which charges for parking; (b) $49.50 in copying fees for "330 copies, including authorities, pleadings, exhibits, and correspondence"; and (c) $437.50 for compensating "an independent contractor" who "dedicated to this Opposition . . . 17.5 hours." According to the plaintiff, his independent contractor's duties include "helping [him] pull authorities, shepherdizing, copying, and packaging pleading for transmittal to the Court and Opposing Counsel" and she "also serves as [his] typist."
The time a pro se litigant spends making or opposing a motion is not included in the reasonable expenses contemplated by Rule 37 of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure. See Walker v. Tri-Tech Planning Consultants, Inc., 149 F.R.D. 22, 23 (E.D.N.Y. 1993). While the