ORDER DENYING MOTION FOR SERVICE

Re: Dkt. No. 56.

DONNA M. RYU, Magistrate Judge.

The court has received Plaintiff James S. Hilton, Jr.'s motion for service, in which he requests that the court order the United States Marshals Service to serve his subpoenas on third parties. [Docket No. 56.] In support of his request, he cites the Honorable Vince Chhabria's April 15, 2019 order granting him leave pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1915 to proceed in forma pauperis ("IFP"); 28 U.S.C. § 1915; and Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 4(c)(3).

Plaintiff's IFP status does not authorize the court to finance his litigation-related expenses, including costs related to the service of subpoenas. See Porter v. Dep't of Treasury, 564 F.3d 176, 180 n.3 (3d Cir. 2009) ("We note that the granting of IFP status exempts litigants from filing fees only. It does not exempt litigants from the costs of copying and filing documents; service of documents other than the complaint; costs, 28 U.S.C. § 1915(f)(1); expert witness fees, Boring v. Kozakiewicz, 833 F.2d 468 (3d Cir. 1987); or sanctions."); see also Starkey v. Hernandez, No. 3:17-cv-01158-JSL-KSC, 2018 WL 2441554, at *1 (S.D. Cal. May 31, 2018) ("this court has no authority to finance or pay for a party's discovery expenses even though the party has been granted leave to proceed in forma pauperis under 28 U.S.C. § 1915(a)"; collecting cases). Further, Rule 4(c)(3) provides that the court must order service of the summons and complaint "by a United States marshal or deputy marshal or by a person specially appointed by the court . . . if the plaintiff is authorized to proceed in forma pauperis under 28 U.S.C. § 1915[.]" It does not authorize the court to pay for or order the service of subpoenas. Accordingly, Plaintiff's motion is denied.

IT IS SO ORDERED.