Raap v. Brier & Thorn

Filing 17

ORDER signed by Judge J.P. Stadtmueller on 6/13/2017: GRANTING 13 Defendant's Motion for Protective Order and QUASHING the subpoenas identified in that motion pursuant to Fed R. Civ P. 26 and 45. (cc: all counsel) (jm)

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
EASTERN DISTRICT OF WISCONSIN
MATTHEW RAAP,
Plaintiff,

v.

Case No. 16-CV-1690-JPS-JPS

BRIER & THORN,
Defendant.

ORDER

On May 17, 2017, Defendant filed a motion for a protective order as
to fourteen subpoenas issued by Plaintiff to Defendant’s customers. (Docket
#13). The subpoenas seek all documents related to the customers’ dealings
with Defendant. (Docket #16-2). Plaintiff’s response to the motion was due
on or before June 7, 2017. Civil L. R. 7(b). As of today’s date, no response
has been received. Defendant’s unopposed motion will, therefore, be
granted as a matter of course. Id. 7(d). The Court further notes that it would
likely grant the motion on its merits. Plaintiff failed to give Defendant prior
notice of the subpoenas in accordance with Federal Rule of Civil Procedure
45. See Fed. R. Civ. P. 45(a)(4). The subpoenas also needlessly infringe on
Defendant’s customer relationships; Plaintiff could have directed the same
discovery requests to Defendant and thereby obtain the information he
desired. United States v. Raineri, 670 F.2d 702, 712 (7th Cir. 1982).
Accordingly,
IT IS ORDERED that Defendant’s motion for a protective order
(Docket #13) be and the same is hereby GRANTED; and

IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that, pursuant to Federal Rules of Civil
Procedure 26 and 45, the subpoenas identified in Defendant’s motion for a
protective order (Docket #13 at 1-2) be and the same are hereby QUASHED.
Dated at Milwaukee, Wisconsin, this 13th day of June, 2017.
BY THE COURT:

____________________________________
J. P. Stadtmueller
U.S. District Judge

Page 2 of 2