LHF Productions, Inc. v. Does 1-31
MEMORANDUM Order: Mary Gutierrez' motion to quash subpoena (#12) is denied. Signed by the Honorable Milton I. Shadur on 10/11/2016:Mailed notice(jms, )
Case: 1:16-cv-06803 Document #: 15 Filed: 10/11/16 Page 1 of 2 PageID #:76
IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
FOR THE NORTHERN DISTRICT OF ILLINOIS
LHF PRODUCTIONS, INC.,
DOES 1 - 31,
Case No. 16 C 6803
In this action brought by LHF Productions, Inc. ("LHF") against 31 "Doe" defendants,
Mary Gutierrez ("Gutierrez") has filed a pro se handwritten "Motion To Squash [sic]" (the
"Motion," Dkt. No. 12) that targets LHF's subpoena to third-party ISP Comcast ("Comcast") that
reads in full:
I am filing this Motion to squash the subpoena based on lack of personal service.
Although filings by pro se litigants are scrutinized through a more generous lens (Haines v.
Kerner, 404 U.S. 519 (1972), that principle does not provide such nonlawyers with a license to
ignore all of the operative pleading standards established by the Federal Rules of Civil
Procedure ("Rule") -- and Gutierrez' filing is a poster child for the application of that principle.
Here Rule 45(b)(3)(A) sets the standards for the quashing or modification of a subpoena,
and the burden of demonstrating that a subpoena fails to meet that Rule's standard is imposed on
the party seeking such relief. Here Gutierrez has said absolutely nothing that would qualify her
for such relief -- indeed, the subpoena is not directed to her but rather to Comcast, which has not
objected. And the fact that Gutierrez has not been served in this action is no basis for
Case: 1:16-cv-06803 Document #: 15 Filed: 10/11/16 Page 2 of 2 PageID #:77
noncompliance with the subpoena by third-party Comcast. In sum, Gutierrez has provided no
arguable basis for considering the Dkt. No. 12 Motion, and it is denied.
Milton I. Shadur
Senior United States District Judge
Date: October 11, 2016
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?