Filed: Dec. 07, 2017
Latest Update: Dec. 07, 2017
Summary: ORDER RE: MOTION TO QUASH Re: Dkt. No. 1 MARIA-ELENA JAMES , Magistrate Judge . ETS Express, Inc. is a defendant in a civil action pending in the Southern District of New York. See Not. of Mot. at 1, Dkt. No. 1. ETS served a subpoena on non-party Google, Inc., purporting to require Google to produce emails from the personal email address of non-party Sarah M. Kauss. See Mot., Ex. A (Subpoena). Ms. Kauss moves to quash the subpoena to Google in its entirety on the ground it violates the
Summary: ORDER RE: MOTION TO QUASH Re: Dkt. No. 1 MARIA-ELENA JAMES , Magistrate Judge . ETS Express, Inc. is a defendant in a civil action pending in the Southern District of New York. See Not. of Mot. at 1, Dkt. No. 1. ETS served a subpoena on non-party Google, Inc., purporting to require Google to produce emails from the personal email address of non-party Sarah M. Kauss. See Mot., Ex. A (Subpoena). Ms. Kauss moves to quash the subpoena to Google in its entirety on the ground it violates the ..
More
ORDER RE: MOTION TO QUASH
Re: Dkt. No. 1
MARIA-ELENA JAMES, Magistrate Judge.
ETS Express, Inc. is a defendant in a civil action pending in the Southern District of New York. See Not. of Mot. at 1, Dkt. No. 1. ETS served a subpoena on non-party Google, Inc., purporting to require Google to produce emails from the personal email address of non-party Sarah M. Kauss. See Mot., Ex. A (Subpoena). Ms. Kauss moves to quash the subpoena to Google in its entirety on the ground it violates the Stored Communications Act (SCA), 18 U.S.C. § 2701 et seq. Mot. at 1. ETS did not file an Opposition. See Dkt. The Court finds this matter suitable for decision without oral argument. See Fed. R. Civ. P. 78(b); Civ. L.R. 7-1(b).
Civil subpoenas are subject to the SCA. See Theofel v. Farey-Jones, 359 F.3d 1066, 1071-72, 1077 (9th Cir. 2004). The SCA generally prohibits "`providers' of communication services from divulging private communications to certain entities and/or individuals." Quon v. Arch Wireless Operating Co., Inc., 529 F.3d 892, 900 (9th Cir. 2008), rev'd on other grounds by City of Ontario v. Quon, 560 U.S. 746 (2010). The SCA allows an electronic communications service provider to "divulge a record or other information pertaining to a subscriber to or customer of such service . . . to any person other than a governmental entity" but emphasizes that such records do "not includ[e] the contents of communications." 18 U.S.C. § 2702(c)(6); see also Svenson v. Google Inc., 65 F.Supp.3d 717, 728 (N.D. Cal. 2014) ("contents" of a communication include "any information concerning the substance, purport, or meaning of that communication", while "record information generally includes the name, address, or client ID number of the entity's customers") (internal quotation marks and citation omitted).
Because ETS has not opposed the Motion, there is no dispute Google is a provider of communication services. See also Low v. LinkedIn Corp., 900 F.Supp.2d 1010, 1022 (N.D. Cal. 2012) ("A provider of email services is an [electronic communications service]"); Theofel, 359 F.3d at 1075 (messages remaining on an ISP for backup purposes after being sent are in electronic storage). ETS' civil subpoena purports to compel Google to produce Ms. Kauss' emails regarding a variety of subjects, including attachments thereto. See Subpoena at ECF p.6. The Subpoena accordingly requests the contents of Ms. Kauss' emails without her consent in violation of the SCA. Ms. Kauss' Motion to Quash is therefore GRANTED.1 See, e.g., Occupy Columbia v. Haley, 2013 WL 12149696 (N.D. Cal. Feb. 15, 2013).
Ms. Kauss shall serve a copy of this Order on ETS and Google.
IT IS SO ORDERED.
