Today, venture capital firm Kleiner Perkins Caufield & Byers (KPCB) told the San Francisco Superior Court that it opposed the efforts of former employee Ellen Pao to reduce the litigation costs that Kleiner says she owes after losing a gender discrimination case that she brought against the firm. The filing also noted that (PDF) since the jury's decision was handed down, Pao has asked Kleiner Perkins for $2.7 million in post-trial fees and costs in exchange for not appealing her case.

In the aftermath of the jury trial, the two sides have been battling over terms to end the fight. The jury sided with Kleiner Perkins in March, deciding that Pao was not passed up for promotions because of her gender, and that Kleiner's decision to fire Pao after she brought her lawsuit was not an act of retaliation. After the trial, Kleiner submitted a request for costs with a bottom line of just under $1 million, including over $800,000 in expert witness fees and $60,000 in deposition costs. Kleiner also noted that it had offered Pao a $964,502 settlement in November before the trial started. It offered to waive the request for costs if Pao agreed not to appeal her case.

Two weeks later, Pao's attorneys fired back, calling Kleiner's bill “grossly excessive and unreasonable.” They argued that a ruling made by the California Supreme Court in early May (PDF) prevented Kleiner from seeking reimbursement for its expert witness fees unless it could prove that Pao had acted with malicious intent in her dealings with Kleiner. Pao's attorneys filed their notice of intent to appeal this week, but they have not yet set forth their official arguments for appeal.

In today's filing, Kleiner's lawyers say that Pao can't use the recent California Supreme Court ruling to invalidate Kleiner's request for more than $800,000 in expert witness fees because Pao “failed to accept a reasonable settlement offer” before the lawsuit went to trial. “Awarding KPCB's post-offer costs does not chill future litigants from bringing meritorious claims, but rather encourages parties to realistically assess the merits of their case prior to trial and settle for a reasonable amount,” Kleiner's lawyers argued.

“Pao cannot run up KPCB's costs through an onslaught of allegations and discovery, and then object when she receives the bill,” the opposition continued. Kleiner also argued that the court should not reduce Pao's obligation to cover Kleiner's bill because she has the funds to pay for it, anyway:

“Here, public policy clearly does not support reducing the expert fee award because of a low-income plaintiff. At the time Pao left KPCB she made $400,000 annually and regularly received annual bonuses over $100,000. She also received and continues to receive substantial sums in carried interest from KPCB funds. Pao is currently interim Chief Executive Officer at reddit where she makes over $200,000 annually and has millions of dollars in stock options. Pao and her husband own multiple residences.”

The opposition filing did not include any details into Pao's alleged, separate, $2.7 million post-trial request. Pao's spokeswoman said that she had no comment on that detail or on Kleiner's objection to Pao's other arguments against Kleiner's claimed costs.

In a statement e-mailed to Ars, Kleiner spokeswoman Christina Lee wrote, “Pao is obligated, as a matter of law, to repay a portion of our legal costs. We have offered to waive these costs as a good faith attempt to bring this matter to a close. In response, Pao demanded an additional $2.7M payment from KPCB in return for not appealing, despite the jury's unequivocal verdict in our favor on all counts. We have no intention of accepting this unreasonable demand.”

Another spokeswoman for Kleiner noted that the firm's offer to waive the litigation costs it says Pao owes still stands if she does not appeal.