Anderson v. Krpan et al

Filing 54

ORDER Denying Plaintiff's 53 Motion for Civil Subpoena, signed by Magistrate Judge Michael J. Seng on 9/10/17. (Gonzalez, R)

Download PDF
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 9 EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA 10 SHAWN ANDERSON, 11 Plaintiff, 12 v. 13 CHRIS KRPAN, et al., CASE NO. 1:14-cv-01380-AWI-MJS (PC) ORDER DENYING PLAINTIFF’S MOTION FOR CIVIL SUBPOENA (ECF No. 53) 14 Defendants. 15 16 17 Plaintiff is a state prisoner proceeding pro se and in forma pauperis in this civil 18 rights action brought pursuant to 42 U.S.C. § 1983. The matter proceeds against 19 Defendants Krpan and Forster for medical indifference in violation of the Eighth 20 Amendment. (ECF No. 30.) Both Defendants have filed answers to Plaintiff’s complaint. 21 (ECF Nos. 40, 41.) 22 On August 18, 2017, Plaintiff filed a one-page, hand-written motion asking the 23 Court to send him “two sets of signed and stamped subpoena to produce documents.” 24 (ECF No. 53.) 25 Subject to certain requirements, Plaintiff is entitled to the issuance of a subpoena 26 commanding the production of documents or electronically stored information relevant to 27 his claim from a nonparty. Fed. R. Civ. P. 34(c), 45. However, the Court will consider 28 1 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 granting such a request only if the documents or electronically stored information sought from the nonparty are not equally available to Plaintiff and are not obtainable from Defendant through a request for production. The Court will not issue a subpoena for a nonparty individual without Plaintiff first following statutory procedure. Here, Plaintiff has not shown he followed the statutory procedure. His motion does not identify what documents he seeks or from whom. For these reasons, IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that Plaintiff’s motion for civil subpoena (ECF No. 53) is DENIED. 9 10 IT IS SO ORDERED. 11 12 Dated: September 10, 2017 /s/ Michael J. Seng UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 2

Disclaimer: Justia Dockets & Filings provides public litigation records from the federal appellate and district courts. These filings and docket sheets should not be considered findings of fact or liability, nor do they necessarily reflect the view of Justia.

Why Is My Information Online?