IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA
August 22, 2012
GREGORY STESHENKO, PLAINTIFF,
THOMAS MCKAY, ET AL., DEFENDANTS.
The opinion of the court was delivered by: Gregory G. Hollows United States Magistrate Judge
Presently before this court is plaintiff's motion to quash subpoena directed to the State of California Employment Development Department ("EDD"), filed August 9, 2012.
Plaintiff seeks an order quashing a subpoena issued by some of the defendants in the underlying action in the Northern District of California*fn1 on non-party EDD. The motion was served only on Dummit, Buschholtz and Trapp, counsel for defendants Scopazzi, Carrillo, Watsonville Community Hospital, and Newell. (Dkt. no. 1 at 4.) A review of the docket in the underlying action indicates that defendants McKay, Nunn, Lucero, and Cabrillo Community College District, and especially non-party EDD were not served with the instant motion. Plaintiff states that due to his indigence he cannot appear in Sacramento for a hearing on the motion; however, he must notice his motion for hearing in accordance with E. D. Local Rule 230(b). He will be permitted to appear by phone.
Accordingly, IT IS ORDERED that: Plaintiff shall notice his motion to quash for hearing in accordance with E. D. Local Rule 230(b), serve the motion on all defendants in the underlying action who have not yet been served, and on non-party Employment Development Department, and file a statement that he has served the motion, within fourteen (14) days of this order.