From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

United States v. Wells

United States District Court, E.D. California
Dec 19, 2005
No. 2:04-cr-0069 MCE (E.D. Cal. Dec. 19, 2005)

Opinion

No. 2:04-cr-0069 MCE.

December 19, 2005


ORDER


SureWest's and Ernst Young's Motions to Quash Defendants' Subpoenas Duces Tecum were referred to a United States Magistrate Judge pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1)(B) and Local Rule 72-302 (b)(1).

On October 17, 2005, the Magistrate Judge filed Findings and Recommendations herein which were served on all parties and which contained notice to all parties that any Objections to the Findings and Recommendations were to be filed within fifteen days. All parties filed objections.

The Court has reviewed the file and finds the Findings and Recommendations to be supported by the record and by the Magistrate Judge's analysis. Accordingly, IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that:

1. The Findings and Recommendations of October 17, 2005 are adopted in full;

2. SureWest's Motion to Quash be granted in part and denied in part and that the documents bearing Bates-stamped page numbers SWC-CR 0001-0014 and 0147-0161 be released to counsel for Jeffrey and Larry Wells within 30 days of the District Court's adoption of these Findings and Recommendations, subject to the Wellses' tendering fees and costs as required by Federal Rule of Criminal Procedure 17(d); and

3. Ernst Young's Motion to Modify and Quash the Subpoena be granted in part and denied in part and that the documents bearing Bates-stamped page numbers EY000023-000029, 000255-000264, 000309-000330 and 00357-000358 be released to counsel for Jeffrey and Larry Wells, also within 30 days of the District Court's adoption of these Findings and Recommendations.


Summaries of

United States v. Wells

United States District Court, E.D. California
Dec 19, 2005
No. 2:04-cr-0069 MCE (E.D. Cal. Dec. 19, 2005)
Case details for

United States v. Wells

Case Details

Full title:UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, Plaintiff, v. JEFFREY WELLS, LARRY J. WELLS…

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

Date published: Dec 19, 2005

Citations

No. 2:04-cr-0069 MCE (E.D. Cal. Dec. 19, 2005)

Citing Cases

United States v. Zhiqiang Zhang

A court must reconsider the Nixon factors when a movant seeking to quash the subpoena claims that compliance…

United States v. McClure

Following Judge Karlton's opinion in United States v. Tomison, the judges in this district have generally…