Bivins v. Rodriguez, 2:18-CV-2671-JAM-DMC-P. (2019)
Court: District Court, E.D. California
Number: infdco20190423886
Visitors: 15
Filed: Apr. 22, 2019
Latest Update: Apr. 22, 2019
Summary: ORDER DENNIS M. COTA , Magistrate Judge . Plaintiff, a prisoner proceeding pro se, brings this civil rights action pursuant to 42 U.S.C. 1983. Pending before the court are: (1) plaintiff's document captioned "Affidavit for Subpoena Duces Tecum" (ECF No. 38); and (2) non-party California Highway Patrol's objections to plaintiff's subpoena (ECF No. 39). To the extent plaintiff seeks an order compelling production of documents pursuant to his subpoena, his motion is defective because he ha
Summary: ORDER DENNIS M. COTA , Magistrate Judge . Plaintiff, a prisoner proceeding pro se, brings this civil rights action pursuant to 42 U.S.C. 1983. Pending before the court are: (1) plaintiff's document captioned "Affidavit for Subpoena Duces Tecum" (ECF No. 38); and (2) non-party California Highway Patrol's objections to plaintiff's subpoena (ECF No. 39). To the extent plaintiff seeks an order compelling production of documents pursuant to his subpoena, his motion is defective because he has..
More
ORDER
DENNIS M. COTA, Magistrate Judge.
Plaintiff, a prisoner proceeding pro se, brings this civil rights action pursuant to 42 U.S.C. § 1983. Pending before the court are: (1) plaintiff's document captioned "Affidavit for Subpoena Duces Tecum" (ECF No. 38); and (2) non-party California Highway Patrol's objections to plaintiff's subpoena (ECF No. 39).
To the extent plaintiff seeks an order compelling production of documents pursuant to his subpoena, his motion is defective because he has not indicated that he attempted in good faith to meet and confer to resolve the dispute informally. See Fed. R. Civ. P. 37(a)(1); see also E. Dist. Cal. Local Rule 251(b). Plaintiff's motion will be denied. To the extent non-party California Highway Patrol seeks an order quashing plaintiff's subpoena, California Highway Patrol has not properly brought such a request before the court by way of a motion under Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 45(d)(3). Non-party California Highway Patrol's objections to plaintiff's subpoena will be overruled without prejudice to raising them in a properly noticed motion to quash.
Accordingly, IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that:
1. Plaintiff's motion (ECF No. 38) is denied; and
2. Non-party California Highway Patrol's objections (ECF No. 39) are overruled without prejudice.
Source: Leagle
