UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

ERIC SCHMIDT, et al., Case No. 23-cv-01527-VC Plaintiffs, ORDER DENYING MOTION FOR Vv. ATTORNEYS’ FEES DEREK RUNDELL, et al., Re: Dkt. No. 26 Defendants.

The motion for fees is denied. The plaintiffs seek $125,887.50 in fees for 148 hours of work. Almost 100 of those hours—costing $84,273.75 in discounted fees—were spent on an unopposed petition to confirm an arbitration award. That alone is unreasonable. See, e.g., EXA- USA, Corporation v. Farnese Terra, Incorporated,

, at *5 (N.D. Cal. Mar. 16, 2023); cf Space Data Corporation v. Hosie Rice LLP,

, at *4—5 (N.D. Cal. Nov. 1, 2021); International Petroleum Products and Additives Company, Inc. v. Black Gold S.A.R.L.,

, at *2—3 (N.D. Cal. Feb. 18, 2020). Although it is tempting to deny the motion with prejudice because it is not even within the ballpark of reasonableness, the plaintiffs will be given one more opportunity. Any renewed motion for fees is due within 14 days of this order. And if the motion is unreasonable on its face, it will be denied with prejudice. IT IS SO ORDERED. Dated: August 2, 2023 = VINCE CHHABRIA United States District Judge