Merrifield et al v. Lockyer et al

Filing 174

ORDER DENYING REQUEST FOR ISSUANCE OF SUBPOENAS. Signed by Judge Maxine M. Chesney on April 1, 2014. (Attachment: # 1 ) (mmclc1, COURT STAFF) (Filed on 4/1/2014) (Additional attachment(s) added on 4/1/2014: # 2 Certificate/Proof of Service) (tlS, COURT STAFF).

Download PDF
1 2 3 4 IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 5 FOR THE NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA 6 7 8 ALAN MERRIFIELD, et al., No. 04-0498 MMC Plaintiffs, 9 ORDER DENYING REQUEST FOR ISSUANCE OF SUBPOENAS v. For the Northern District of California United States District Court 10 BILL LOCKYER, et al., 11 Defendants 12 / 13 On May 29, 2009, the Court entered judgment in the above-titled case in favor of 14 plaintiffs, and closed the file. Thereafter, on March 31, 2014, plaintiff Alan Merrifield 15 (“Merrifield”), purportedly acting pro se, submitted to the Clerk of Court two proposed 16 subpoenas, which he requested the Clerk issue.1 17 A review of the docket indicates that Merrifield is represented by counsel, and, 18 accordingly, any request for court action must be made through his counsel of record. 19 Moreover, Merrifield, who is not an attorney, cannot seek relief on behalf of any party other 20 than himself, and the proposed subpoenas seek documents that pertain to government 21 action involving other persons. See McShane v. United States, 366 F.2d 286, 288 (9th Cir. 22 1966) (holding individual proceeding pro se may only represent himself) 23 Accordingly, the request for issuance of said subpoenas is hereby DENIED. 24 IT IS SO ORDERED. 25 26 Dated: April 1, 2014 MAXINE M. CHESNEY United States District Judge 27 28 1 For reference, the proposed subpoenas are attached hereto.

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?