Bischoff v. Brittain

Full title: SCOTT BISCHOFF, et al., Plaintiffs, v. SANDRA BRITTAIN, et al., Defendants.

Court: United States District Court, Ninth Circuit, California, E.D. California

Date published: Nov 3, 2015

2:14-cv-1970 KJM CKD (E.D. Cal. Nov. 3, 2015)

Opinion

SCOTT BISCHOFF, et al., Plaintiffs, v. SANDRA BRITTAIN, et al., Defendants. No. 2:14-cv-1970 KJM CKD United States District Court, E.D. California. November 3, 2015

          ORDER

          CAROLYN K. DELANEY, Magistrate Judge.

         Defendant has noticed a motion to quash for hearing on November 18, 2015. The subpoena at issue calls for production of documents at a law office located in Redwood City, which is located in the Northern District of California. Under Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 45(d)(3), a motion to quash must be brought in the court for the district where compliance is required. The motion to quash was therefore improvidently filed in this District.

         Accordingly, IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that defendant's motion to quash (ECF No. 59) is denied without prejudice to its renewal in the proper District.