Savan Magic Ltd.

Filing 31

ORDER Denying as moot 12 Motion to Quash and Denying as moot 28 Emergency Motion for Leave to File a Surreply. Signed by Magistrate Judge Nancy J. Koppe on 9/6/2017. (Copies have been distributed pursuant to the NEF - SLD)

1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

11

DISTRICT OF NEVADA

12
13

IN RE APPLICATION OF SAVAN
MAGIC LTD. TO TAKE
DISCOVERY PURSUANT TO
28 U.S.C. § 1782

14
15

)
)
)
)
)
)

Case No. 2:17-cv-01689-JCM-NJK
ORDER (Docket Nos. 12, 28)

16

Pending before the Court is Respondent’s motion to quash. Docket No. 12. Petitioner filed a

17

response, and Respondent filed a reply. Docket Nos. 23, 27. Respondent’s motion seeks the quashing

18

of a subpoena for documents and deposition testimony that was served on him on July 15, 2017. See

19

Docket No. 12 at 10. Petitioner does not meaningfully dispute that the subpoena was defective, and

20

thereafter withdrew the subpoena. Docket No. 23 at 4. Accordingly, the dispute presented through

21

motion to quash has resolved itself, and the motion to quash is therefore DENIED as moot.1

22

Petitioner served Respondent with a new subpoena after the motion to quash was filed. See

23

Docket No. 23 at 8. In addition to attempting to rectify alleged procedural defects with the original

24

subpoena, Petitioner also changed the discovery sought in the second subpoena. See, e.g., id. As the

25

second subpoena is not at issue in the motion, any dispute arising out of it is not properly before the

26

Court, and the Court declines to address the propriety of that second subpoena based on the shifting

27
28

1

Respondent’s request for attorney’s fees and costs in relation to his motion to quash is DENIED.

1

briefing of the parties. To the extent the parties dispute the propriety of the second subpoena, a proper

2

motion must be filed addressing that particular subpoena filed after a proper meet-and-confer if Court

3

intervention is required. If those circumstances exist, Petitioner shall file a motion to compel no later

4

than September 20, 2017.2 That motion will be briefed pursuant to the default schedule in the local

5

rules, and will be decided in the ordinary course. Moreover, the Court DENIES as moot the motion to

6

file a surreply (Docket No. 28).

7

IT IS SO ORDERED.

8

DATED: September 6, 2017

9
______________________________________
NANCY J. KOPPE
United States Magistrate Judge

10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
2

26
27
28

The Court will not entertain any counter-motion to quash or for protective order. All relevant
arguments should be included in briefing the motion to compel. To the extent the Court finds any or all of
the discovery sought to be improper, it will issue sua sponte an order protecting Respondent from that
discovery. E.g., Fed. R. Civ. P. 37(a)(5)(B) (“If the motion [to compel] is denied, the court may issue any
protective order authorized under Rule 26(c)”).
2