Mercexchange, L.L.C. v. eBay Inc. et al

Filing 17

ORDER denying without prejudice 1 Defendants Ebay Inc.'s and Half.com's Motion to Compel Fish & Richardson P.C. to comply with a subpoena duces tecum and, denying without prejudice 7 Plaintiff's Motion to Quash subpoena duces tecum upon Fish & Richardson. Signed by Judge Louisa S Porter on 02/16/07. (jpp, )

Download PDF
Mercexchange, L.L.C. v. eBay Inc. et al Doc. 17 Case 3:07-cv-00231-IEG-POR Document 17 Filed 02/16/2007 Page 1 of 2 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 On February 2, 2007, Defendants filed a Motion to Compel Fish & Richardson P.C. to Comply with Subpoena Duces Tecum ("Motion to Compel") [Doc. No. 1]. This Court did not receive Defendants' Motion to Compel until February 6, 2007. On February 9, 2007, the subpoenaed party, Fish & Richardson P.C., filed an Opposition to Defendants' Motion to Compel [Doc. No. 5]. On that same day, Plaintiff filed an Opposition to Defendants' Motion to Compel [Doc. No. 10] and a Motion to Quash Subpoena Duces Tecum Upon Fish & Richardson P.C. ("Motion to Quash") [Doc. No. 7]. Defendants filed a Reply in support of their Motion to Compel [Doc. No. 13] and Opposition to Plaintiff's Motion to Quash [Doc. No. 15] on February 13, 2007. Magistrate Judge James Bradberry of the United States District Court Eastern District of Virginia ("Virginia Court") addressed the issue of discovery disputes arising from the parties' limited discovery in his December 18, 2006 Order. Specifically, Magistrate Judge Bradberry's Order states "In the event that discovery disputes arise, the parties must contact Magistrate Judge -107cv0231 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA MERCEXCHANGE, L.L.C., Plaintiff, v. EBAY INC. AND HALF.COM, INC., Defendants. Civil No. 07cv0231-IEG (POR) ORDER (1) DENYING DEFENDANTS EBAY INC.'S AND HALF.COM'S MOTION TO COMPEL FISH & RICHARDSON P.C. TO COMPLY WITH A SUBPOENA DUCES TECUM AND (2) DENYING PLAINTIFF'S MOTION TO QUASH SUBPOENA DUCES TECUM UPON FISH & RICHARDSON P.C. [Doc. Nos. 1, 7] Dockets.Justia.com Case 3:07-cv-00231-IEG-POR Document 17 Filed 02/16/2007 Page 2 of 2 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 James Bradberry no later than February 6, 2007, to determine an expedited discovery dispute procedure." (Declaration of Ann Marie Mortimer in Support of Plaintiff Mercexchange, L.L.C.'s Brief in Opposition to Defendants' Motion to Compel Enforcement of Subpoena Duces Tecum Upon Fish & Richardson P.C., Exhibit 1 at 16.) Further, the subpoenaed party, Fish & Richardson, is Plaintiff's lawyer in this case. Although Defendants argue Fish & Richardson is a third party, Fish & Richardson is counsel for Plaintiff and is litigating two pending motions before the Virginia Court. Accordingly, this Court defers to the Virginia Court and finds (1) Defendants' Motion to Compel is DENIED without prejudice to allow Defendants to bring their motion before the proper court, and (2) Plaintiff's Motion to Quash is DENIED without prejudice to allow Plaintiffs to bring their motion before the proper court. IT IS SO ORDERED. DATED: February 16, 2007 LOUISA S PORTER United States Magistrate Judge cc: District Judge All parties -2- 07cv0231

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?