In Re Third Party Subpoenas Issued to Florence Paau

Filing 6

ORDER TO SHOW CAUSE by Magistrate Judge Rozella A. Oliver. As to the deposition subpoena, it appears that the district of compliance is the Southern District of California, in light of Paau's address in Oceanside, CA, a city within San Diego C ounty. As to the documents subpoena, although a subpoena-related motion could be heard in this district, it appears that the motion could also be heard in the Southern District of California in light of Paau's location. The Court therefore ord ers Movant to show cause as to why this matter should not be transferred to the Southern District of California. Movant's response shall be due by January 14, 2025. Alternatively, Movant may dismiss this matter without prejudice and re-file it in the Southern District of California. IT IS SO ORDERED. [See document for details.] (san)

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
CENTRAL DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA
CIVIL MINUTES – GENERAL
Case No.:
Title:

MC 24-00164 MRA (RAOx)
Date:
In Re Third Party Subpoenas Issued to Florence Paau

Present:

January 7, 2025

The Honorable ROZELLA A. OLIVER, U.S. MAGISTRATE JUDGE
Eddie Ramirez
Deputy Clerk

N/A
Court Reporter / Recorder

Attorneys Present for Plaintiff(s):

Attorneys Present for Defendant(s):

N/A

N/A

Proceedings:

ORDER TO SHOW CAUSE

On December 23, 2024, Movant American Airlines, Inc. (“Movant”) filed a Motion to
Compel Compliance with Subpoenas Issued to Non-Party Florence Paau (“Paau”). Dkt. No. 1.
There are two subpoenas at issue—a subpoena for production of documents and a deposition
subpoena. Dkt. Nos. 1-5, 1-6. The address listed for Paau on both subpoenas and the proof of
service is in Oceanside, CA. Id.; see also Dkt. Nos. 1-7, 1-8. The deposition subpoena provides
that the deposition will take place by videoconference. Dkt. No. 1-6. The documents subpoena
lists an address of compliance in Los Angeles, CA. Dkt. No. 1-5.
Motions related to subpoenas must be brought in the district of compliance. See Fed. R.
Civ. P. 45(d)(3), (f), (g); see also Fed. R. Civ. P. 45, Advisory Committee’s Note to 2013
Amendment (“To protect local nonparties, local resolution of disputes about subpoenas is assured
by the limitations of Rule 45(c) and the requirements in Rules 45(d) and (e) that motions be made
in the court in which compliance is required under Rule 45(c).”).
As to the deposition subpoena, it appears that the district of compliance is the Southern
District of California, in light of Paau’s address in Oceanside, CA, a city within San Diego County.
See Fed. R. Civ. P. 30(b)(4) (“[T]he deposition takes place where the deponent answers the
questions.”). As to the documents subpoena, although a subpoena-related motion could be heard
in this district, it appears that the motion could also be heard in the Southern District of California
in light of Paau’s location. See York Holding, Ltd. v. Waid, 345 F.R.D. 626, 628-630 (D. Nev.
2024) (collecting cases finding that location of subpoenaed nonparty is district of compliance).
The Court therefore orders Movant to show cause as to why this matter should not be
transferred to the Southern District of California. Movant’s response shall be due by January 14,

CV-90 (05/15)

CIVIL MINUTES - GENERAL

Page 1 of 2

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
CENTRAL DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA
CIVIL MINUTES – GENERAL
Case No.:
Title:

MC 24-00164 MRA (RAOx)
Date:
In Re Third Party Subpoenas Issued to Florence Paau

January 7, 2025

2025. Alternatively, Movant may dismiss this matter without prejudice and re-file it in the
Southern District of California.
IT IS SO ORDERED.
Initials of Preparer

CV-90 (05/15)

CIVIL MINUTES - GENERAL

:
er

Page 2 of 2