The opinion of the court was delivered by: James Alesia, Senior District Judge.
MEMORANDUM OPINION AND ORDER
On February 13, 2003, this court granted defendant's motion for summary judgment and entered final judgment in favor of defendant UOP LLC and against plaintiff Shirley Riley. Riley v. UOP LLC, 244 F. Supp.2d 928 (N.D.Ill. 2003). Currently before the court is defendant's bill of costs. For the reasons set forth below, the court grants in part and denies in part defendant's bill of costs.
Rule 54(d) of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure sets forth the general rule that costs other than attorneys' fees "`shall be allowed as of course to the prevailing party,'" except as otherwise provided by statute or in the rules. Payne v. Milwaukee County, 288 F.3d 1021, 1027 (7th Cir. 2002) (quoting Fed.R. Civ. P. 54(d)). The proper measure of those costs is set forth in 28 U.S.C. § 1920 (" § 1920"). Tidemann v. Nadler Golf Car Sales, Inc., 224 F.3d 719, 726 (7th Cir. 2000). The costs explicitly allowed by § 1920 are: (1) the fees of the clerk and marshal; (2) fees for court reporters and transcripts; (3) fees for printing and witnesses; (4) fees for copies of papers necessarily obtained for use in the case; (5) docket fees; and (6) compensation of court-appointed experts and interpreters. § 1920. There is a heavy presumption in favor of awarding costs to the prevailing party. Majeske v. City of Chicago, 218 F.3d 816, 824 (7th Cir. 2000). Taxing costs against a losing party requires two inquiries: (1) whether the cost imposed upon the losing party is recoverable, and (2) if so, whether the amount assessed for that item was reasonable. Id.
Defendant seeks recovery for the following in its bill of costs: (1) $427.40 for photocopying costs — itemized on the bill of costs as "fees and disbursements for printing"; (2) $4,082.23 for court reporting and transcription fees; (3) $30.00 for witness fees; and (4) $80.90 for exemplification and copies of papers. Because all these costs are recoverable under § 1920, the court's only inquiry is whether the amount assessed for each item is reasonable. The court will review the reasonableness of each amount in turn.
Defendant seeks to recover $427.40 in photocopying charges. Plaintiff argues that defendant is not entitled to recover the full amount of these costs because the per-page rate claimed by defendant is unreasonable. However, plaintiff does not object to the number of pages for which defendant seeks to recover costs.
As a general rule, a prevailing party can recover costs to photocopy "papers necessarily obtained for use in the case." 28 U.S.C. § 1920(4). The language "for use in the case" refers to materials actually prepared for use in presenting evidence to the court. Teerling v. Fleetwood Motor Homes of Ind., Inc., No. 99 C 5926, 2001 WL 883699, at *2 (N.D.Ill. Aug.2, 2001) (citing MecIlveen v. Stone Container Corp., 910 F.2d 1581, 1584 (7th Cir. 1990)). This means that photocopying charges for discovery and the court's copies of documents can be awarded, but charges for copies made solely for attorney convenience cannot. Id. The court finds that all the documents for which defendants seek copying costs were necessarily obtained for use in this case. Thus, the court need determine only the appropriate per-page rate.
Charges for in-house reproduction may not exceed the charges of an outside print shop. Antonson v. United Armored Servs., Inc., No. 00 C 4095, 2002 WL 908424, at *2 (N.D.Ill. May 6, 2002) (citing Martin v. United States, 931 F.2d 453, 455 (7th Cir. 1991)). Local print shops charge $0.09 and $0.10 per page for standard photocopying. See, e.g., Id. (finding that $0.10 per page is a reasonable charge for in-house copying). Per page charges exceeding those of outside print shops for standard copying are allowed only when a party presents the court with an explanation as to why such charges are appropriate. Rogers v. City of Chicago, No. 00 C 2227, 2002 WL 423723, at *4 (N.D.Ill. Mar. 15, 2002) (citing Manley v. City of Chicago, 236 F.3d 392, 398 (7th Cir. 2001)). In this case, defendant explains that $0.20 per page is the standard charge for in-house copying at defense counsel's firm. However, the court is unpersuaded by this argument and will apply the usual rate of $0.10 per page.
Therefore, the court finds that defendant is entitled to recover the costs of copying 2,137 pages at a rate of $0.10 per page. Accordingly, the court reduces defendant's bill of costs by $213.70 and grants defendant's bill of costs to the extent that it may recover $213.70 in copying costs.
C. Court Reporting and Transcription Fees
Defendants seek court reporting and transcription fees of $4,082.23. This includes: (1) court reporter fees and original transcripts for the depositions of Shirley Riley ("Riley"), Otis Dixon ("Dixon"), Terrance K. Brodin ("Brodin"), and Steven Armstrong ("Armstrong") and (2) copies of the deposition transcripts of Aaron Beck ("Beck"), Roderick Ives ("Ives"), and Mark Waypa ("Waypa").
According to Local Rule 54.1(b), "the costs of the transcript or deposition shall not exceed the regular copy rate as established by the Judicial Conference of the United States and in effect at the time the transcript or deposition was filed unless some other rate was previously provided for by order of court." Loc. R. 54.1(b). The Judicial Conference Rate allowed for original deposition transcripts is $3.00 per page, and the rate allowed for a transcript copy is $0.75 per page. VI. Judicial Conference of the United States Guide to Judiciary Policies and Procedures, Court Reporters Manual, ch. 20, pt. 20.3 (1998) ("Court Reporters Manual"). This fee covers all costs of transcript production. Id. at pt. 20.8. See also Cengr v. Fusibond Piping Sys., Inc., 135 F.3d 445, 456 (7th Cir. 1998)(summarizing the judicial conference rates applicable to various types of transcripts). Defendant argues that it is entitled to recover the rates that it was ...