Source: s3://data.kl3m.ai/documents/govinfo/USCOURTS/USCOURTS-caed-1_10-cv-00006/USCOURTS-caed-1_10-cv-00006-18/pdf.json

Nature of Suit Code: 550
Nature of Suit: Prisoner - Civil Rights (U.S. defendant)
Cause of Action: 42:1983 Prisoner Civil Rights

---

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

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

JASON LATRELL THOMAS,

Plaintiff,

v.

M. WILBER, et al.,

Defendants.

_____________________________________/

Case No. 1:10-cv-00006-SKO (PC)

ORDER DENYING PLAINTIFF’S MOTION 

TO COMPEL AND FOR ISSUANCE OF 

SUBPOENAS DUCES TECUM, WITH 

PREJUDICE, AS UNTIMELY, AND 

INFORMING PLAINTIFF OF AMOUNTS 

DUE TO OBTAIN SUBPOENAS AD 

TESTIFICANDUM FOR TRIAL

WITNESSES

(Doc. 108)

Plaintiff Jason Latrell Thomas, a state prisoner proceeding pro se and in forma pauperis, 

filed this civil rights action pursuant to 42 U.S.C. § 1983 on January 4, 2010. Pursuant to the 

scheduling order filed on April 30, 2014, this matter is set for jury trial on: (1) Plaintiff’s Eighth 

Amendment excessive force claim against Defendants Vikjord and Hernandez, (2) Plaintiff’s First 

Amendment retaliation claim against Defendants Vikjord and Hernandez arising out of the use of 

force on August 25, 2007, and (3) Plaintiff’s First Amendment retaliation claim against 

Defendants Frescura and Price arising out of the use of force on or around February 18, 2007. 

On June 4, 2014, Plaintiff filed a motion to compel Defendants to produce documents. 

Fed. R. Civ. P. 37. (Doc. 108.) Plaintiff also seeks the issuance of subpoenas commanding third 

party witnesses Sergeant T. Borges, Sergeant J. A. Keeney, and Registered Nurse C. Ramos to 

produce documents and to testify at trial. Fed. R. Civ. P. 45. Defendants Frescura, Hernandez, 

Case 1:10-cv-00006-SKO Document 113 Filed 08/04/14 Page 1 of 3
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

Price, and Vikjord (“Defendants”) filed an opposition on June 18, 2014, and the motion was 

submitted upon the record without oral argument pursuant to Local Rule 230(l). (Doc. 110.)

Plaintiff’s motion to modify the scheduling order to conduct further discovery was denied 

on April 30, 2014, and his motion for reconsideration of that order was denied in a separate order 

issued concurrently with this order. Thus, discovery is closed and Plaintiff’s motion to compel 

Defendants to produce documents is denied, with prejudice.

To the extent Plaintiff is seeking the issuance of subpoenas duces tecum commanding the 

production of documents from third parties Borges, Keeney, and Ramos, the expired discovery 

deadline also applies to this request and it is denied as untimely.1 Fed. R. Civ. P. 45(a)(1)(D); 

Integra Lifesciences I, Ltd. v. Merck KGaA, 190 F.R.D. 556, 561 (S.D.Cal. 1999).

With respect to obtaining subpoenas ad testificandum commanding the attendance of 

Borges, Keeney, and Ramos at trial, Plaintiff must comply with the terms of the second scheduling 

order by March 16, 2015. Fed. R. Civ. P. 45. To that end, Plaintiff is informed that for each of 

the three witnesses he seeks to subpoena, he must submit a money order or cashier’s check made 

payable to the witness in the amount of $100.21.

2,3

 28 U.S.C. § 1821.

Accordingly, based on the foregoing, Plaintiff’s motion (1) to compel the production of 

documents and (2) for the issuance of subpoenas duces tecum commanding the production of 

documents from third parties is HEREBY ORDERED DENIED; and Plaintiff is informed that if 

 

1 While there may be circumstances under which Rule 45 trial subpoenas can be properly used to obtain documents 

for use at trial, the scope of that exception is very limited and the device cannot be used “as an improper means to 

engage in discovery after the cut-off date.” Integra Lifesciences I, Ltd. v. Merck KGaA, 190 F.R.D. 556, 562

(S.D.Cal. 1999) (citing Puritan Inv. Corp. v. ASLL Corp., No. Civ.A. 97-1580, 1997 WL 793569, at *2 (E.D.Pa. Dec. 

9, 1997)). Although Plaintiff would face an uphill battle on that issue, any further discussion is premature given that 

Plaintiff is first required to tender witness fees and mileage for third party witnesses. If Plaintiff has the funds to 

obtain the issuance of subpoenas ad testificandum, he may at that time identify the documents to be produced at trial 

by the witnesses and make an offer of proof regarding the purpose for which the documents are sought and why they 

were not obtained prior to the discovery deadline. See id. at 561-62.

2 The daily witness fee of $40.00 plus round-trip mileage of $60.21. Mileage reimbursement is $0.56 per mile and 

California State Prison-Corcoran is 53.76 miles away. The Court bears no responsibility for verifying the witnesses’ 

current locations but based on the events giving rise to this action and Plaintiff’s description of their involvement, they 

are or were employed at California State Prison-Corcoran.

3 With respect to Defendants’ statement regarding opposing Plaintiff’s witness motion pursuant to the briefing 

scheduling in the second scheduling order, Defendants may file an opposition to Plaintiff’s motion for the attendance 

of incarcerated witnesses, but if Plaintiff has the funds to subpoena unincarcerated witnesses to testify, Plaintiff is not 

required to file a motion. The third party witnesses, of course, have remedies available to them under Rule 45 if they 

are served with subpoenas ad testificandum. 

Case 1:10-cv-00006-SKO Document 113 Filed 08/04/14 Page 2 of 3
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

3

he seeks the issuance of subpoenas ad testificandum commanding the appearance of third party 

witnesses Borges, Keeney, and Ramos at trial, he must submit three money orders in the amount 

of $100.21 each on or before March 16, 2015.

IT IS SO ORDERED.

Dated: August 1, 2014 /s/ Sheila K. Oberto 

UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE

Case 1:10-cv-00006-SKO Document 113 Filed 08/04/14 Page 3 of 3