Source: s3://data.kl3m.ai/documents/govinfo/USCOURTS/USCOURTS-casd-3_09-cv-02754/USCOURTS-casd-3_09-cv-02754-0/pdf.json

Nature of Suit Code: 430
Nature of Suit: Banks and Banking
Cause of Action: 28:1331 Fed. Question

---

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25

26

27

28

- 1 - 09cv2754

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

STEVEN REGER and TRANS UNION,

LLC,

Petitioners,

CASE NO. 09cv2754 DMS (AJB)

ORDER GRANTING PETITION

TO QUASH SUBPOENA

vs.

BRENDA CAMPBELL,

Respondent.

This case comes before the Court on Petitioner Trans Union LLC’s petition to quash a

subpoena issued by counsel for Brenda Campbell to Steve Reger, Director of Consumer Relations for

Trans Union, LLC. The deposition subpoena issued from this Court on December 4, 2009, and listed

December 11, 2009, as the date of the deposition, and a business center in La Mirada, California, as

the location for the deposition. Mr. Reger’s address is listed as Fullerton, California. Mr. Reger

received the subpoena on December 7, 2009. 

On December 10, 2009, Trans Union, LLC filed the present petition to quash the subpoena.

The Court heard argument from counsel for Trans Union, Ms. Campbell, and Experian Information

Solutions, Inc. (the defendant in the underlying case) this afternoon. After reviewing the petition, the

documents submitted therewith, the relevant case law, and hearing oral argument from counsel, the

Court grants the petition to quash the subpoena. 

Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 45(a)(2)(B) requires that deposition subpoenas issue “from

the court for the district where the deposition is to be taken.” Fed. R. Civ. P. 45(a)(2)(B). Here, the

Case 3:09-cv-02754-DMS-AJB Document 4 Filed 12/10/09 Page 1 of 2
1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25

26

27

28

- 2 - 09cv2754

deposition is to be taken in La Mirada, California. La Mirada is in Los Angeles County, which is

within the United States District Court for the Central District of California, Western Division. See

28 U.S.C. § 84(c)(2). Therefore, the deposition subpoena at issue here should have issued from the

Central District of California, not the Southern District of California. This failure to comply with the

Rule renders the subpoena defective and unenforceable. See Hallamore Corp. v. Capco Steel Corp.,

259 F.R.D. 76, 79 (D. Del. 2009). Accordingly, the Court grants the petition to quash the subpoena.

IT IS SO ORDERED.

DATED: December 10, 2009

HON. DANA M. SABRAW

United States District Judge

Case 3:09-cv-02754-DMS-AJB Document 4 Filed 12/10/09 Page 2 of 2