Hilton v. Pagani Worldwide LLC et al

Filing 68

Order by Magistrate Judge Donna M. Ryu denying 56 Ex Parte Application for Service. Signed on 10/8/2019.(dmrlc1, COURT STAFF) (Filed on 10/8/2019)

1
2
3
4

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

5

NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

6
7

JAMES SHELDON HILTON,
Plaintiff,

8
9
10

United States District Court
Northern District of California

11
12

Case No. 19-cv-01848-VC (DMR)
ORDER DENYING MOTION FOR
SERVICE

v.
PAGANI WORLDWIDE LLC, et al.,

Re: Dkt. No. 56

Defendants.
The court has received Plaintiff James S. Hilton, Jr.’s motion for service, in which he

13

requests that the court order the United States Marshals Service to serve his subpoenas on third

14

parties. [Docket No. 56.] In support of his request, he cites the Honorable Vince Chhabria’s April

15

15, 2019 order granting him leave pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1915 to proceed in forma pauperis

16

(“IFP”); 28 U.S.C. § 1915; and Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 4(c)(3).

17

Plaintiff’s IFP status does not authorize the court to finance his litigation-related expenses,

18

including costs related to the service of subpoenas. See Porter v. Dep’t of Treasury, 564 F.3d 176,

19

180 n.3 (3d Cir. 2009) (“We note that the granting of IFP status exempts litigants from filing fees

20

only. It does not exempt litigants from the costs of copying and filing documents; service of

21

documents other than the complaint; costs, 28 U.S.C. § 1915(f)(1); expert witness fees, Boring v.

22
23
24
25
26
27
28

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

1

authorize the court to pay for or order the service of subpoenas. Accordingly, Plaintiff’s motion is

2

denied.

S

RT

R NIA

FO

______________________________________
Donna M. Ryu
M. Ryu
United States Magistrate Judge
Donna
udge

J

ER

H

8
9
10
11

United States District Court
Northern District of California

DERED

O OR
IT IS S

NO

7

Dated: October 8, 2019

LI

6

IT IS SO ORDERED.

12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
2

A

5

UNIT
ED

4

RT
U
O

3

S DISTRICT
TE
C
TA

N

D IS T IC T
R

OF

C