Schmidt, et al v. United States of America, et al

Filing 96

ORDER signed by Magistrate Judge Gregory G. Hollows on 4/24/2013 ORDERING that the court not interfere with voluntary compliance of the subpoenas filed 4/12/2013 and 4/17/2013, nor hear motions to enforce said subpoenas; DETERMINING that 85 , 86 , 87 , 88 , 89 , 90 , 91 , 92 , 93 , 94 Subpoenas will not be enforced; DENYING 95 Motion to Quash as moot; VACATING the Motion Hearing as to 95 Motion to Quash set for 5/23/2013; DIRECTING the Clerk of Court to serve Lawrence Warfield and Warfield and Company. (Michel, G)

Download PDF
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 9 FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA 10 LONNIE G. SCHMIDT, et al., 11 12 Plaintiffs, No. 2:09-cv-0660 LKK GGH PS vs. 13 UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, et al., 14 Defendants. 15 ORDER / 16 Plaintiffs have filed ten subpoenas on non-parties which reflect service between 17 April 5 and 9, 2013, and require production of documents between April 22 and 24, 2013. (Dkt. 18 nos. 85-94.) Some of the subpoenaed parties have filed motions to quash. The scheduling order 19 in this case, which recently extended the discovery cutoff from January 24, 2013 to April 24, 20 2013, requires: 21 22 23 24 25 All discovery is left open, save and except that it shall be so conducted as to be completed by [April 24, 2013]. The word “completed” means that all discovery shall have been conducted so that all depositions have been taken and any disputes relative to discovery shall have been resolved by appropriate order if necessary and, where discovery has been ordered, the order has been complied with. Motions to compel discovery must be noticed on the undersigned’s calendar in accordance with the local rules of this court and so that such motions will be heard not later than [two weeks prior to the discovery cutoff]. 26 1 1 (Dkt. nos. 69, 80.) The subpoenas were served so close to the discovery cutoff that they violate 2 the terms of the order. By waiting until the eleventh hour to propound this discovery, plaintiffs 3 have effectively ensured that any disputes concerning such subpoenas could not possibly be 4 resolved by April 24, 2013. Plaintiffs should have moved for an extension to the discovery 5 cutoff long ago if they had a reasonable excuse for waiting so long to issue the subpoenas. 6 Accordingly, IT IS ORDERED that: 7 1. While the court will not interfere with voluntary compliance with the 8 subpoenas, neither will the court hear motions to enforce the subpoenas. The subpoenas, filed 9 April 12 and 17, 2013, (dkt. nos. 85-94), will not be enforced; and 10 11 12 2. The motion to quash, filed April 23, 2013, by Lawrence Warfield and Warfield and Company, (dkt. no. 95), is denied as moot and vacated from the calendar for May 23, 2013. 3. The Clerk shall serve Lawrence Warfield and Warfield and Company at the 13 address indicated in their motions. 14 DATED: April 24, 2013 15 /s/ Gregory G. Hollows UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE 16 17 18 GGH:076/Schmidt0660.subp.wpd 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 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?