Source: s3://data.kl3m.ai/documents/govinfo/USCOURTS/USCOURTS-azd-2_05-cv-02460/USCOURTS-azd-2_05-cv-02460-10/pdf.json

Nature of Suit Code: 371
Nature of Suit: Truth in Lending
Cause of Action: 15:1681 Fair Credit Reporting Act

---

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

WO

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

FOR THE DISTRICT OF ARIZONA

Kathy Grismore,

Plaintiff,

v.

Capital One F.S.B., Capital One Services,

Inc., and Capital One Bank,

Defendants

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

No. CIV 05-2460-PHX-SMM

ORDER

Currently pending before the Court is the Motion to Quash (Doc. 107) filed by

Defendants Capital One Bank, Capital One, F.S.B., and Capital One Services, Inc.

(collectively“Capital One”). Defendants have moved to quash the Subpoena transmitted to

TransUnion on or about January 25, 2008 to compel production of TransUnion’s documents

and a deposition upon written questions (the “Subpoena”).

Capital One objects to the Subpoena based on the following assertions: (1) the

Subpoena improperly requires the non-party TransUnion to travel more than 100 miles from

its place of business; (2) the Subpoena failed to issue from a court with proper jurisdiction

over TransUnion; (3) the Subpoena was not timely served to Capital One; and (4) the

Subpoena commands that TransUnion transmit all documents only to Ms. Grismore, and not

to Capital One.

Fed. R. Civ. P. 45(c)(3)(A)(ii):

The Subpoena requires nonparty TransUnion, a business located in Chicago, IL, to

travel to Mesa, AZ. Fed. R. Civ. P. 45(c)(3)(A)(ii) prohibits a subpoena from requiring that

Case 2:05-cv-02460-SMM Document 116 Filed 03/03/08 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 -

a non-party travel more than 100 miles from its place of business for a deposition upon

written questions. It is undisputed that TransUnion is located substantially more than 100

miles from Mesa, Arizona. Furthermore, the deposition upon written questions requires that

the custodian of records be present in Arizona for the recording of the responses to the

written questions. Consequently, Plaintiff cannot compel TransUnion to travel to Arizona in

order for Plaintiff to conduct the deposition(s). Fed. R. Civ. P. 45(c)(3)(A)(ii).

Fed. R. Civ. P. 45(a)(2)(B)&(C):

The Subpoena issued to TransUnion originated from the United States District Court,

District of Arizona. The Federal Rules of Civil Procedure require that the subpoena for

attendance at a deposition or for production of documents must issue from the district court

where such deposition or production will take place. Fed. R. Civ. P. 45(a)(2)(B)&(C). The

instant Subpoena was issued by the District of Arizona. Because Fed. R. Civ. P.

45(c)(3)(A)(ii) requires that TransUnion travel no more than 100 miles from its place of

business, the proper subpoena-issuing court is the United States District Court for the District

of Illinois. 

Fed. R. Civ. P. 32(a)(4):

Ms. Grismore hand-delivered the Subpoena, including the questions for the deposition

upon written questions, to Capital One on January 29, 2008. Fed. R. Civ. P. 32(a)(4) provides

that “Within 14 days after the notice and written questions are served, a party may serve

cross questions upon all other parties.” (Emphasis added). Pursuant to the Rules, because

Ms. Grismore delivered the questions to Capital One on January 29, 2008, Capital One was

entitled to 14 days to respond with cross questions. Thus, Capital One was not required to

serve cross questions until February 12, 2008. The Subpoena, however, requires that the

deposition upon written questions take place on February 11, 2008, which did not permit

Capital One the time required by the rules to serve cross questions. To be timely, the written

questions had to be hand-delivered to Capital One no later than January 28, 2008. Therefore,

Case 2:05-cv-02460-SMM Document 116 Filed 03/03/08 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 -

Defendants were correct in contending that the Subpoena for a deposition upon written

questions was not timely delivered to Capital One.

Fed. R. Civ. P. 26(b):

Ms. Grismore’s Subpoena requires that all documents or information be released “to

her and only her.” (Subpoena at p. 3.) The Subpoena expressly excludes Capital One from

obtaining copies of the documents TransUnion was requested to provide. However, Capital

One is entitled to all discovery taken in this matter and is entitled to obtain copies (at its own

expense) of everything that Ms. Grismore receives from any non-party relating to this case

or relating to any interrogatory or request for production that Capital One has served. See

Fed. R. Civ. P. 26(b). Consequently, as correctly established by Defendants, the Subpoena

excluding Capital One from obtaining copies of discovery is facially invalid.

Accordingly,

IT IS HEREBY ORDERED GRANTING Defendants’ Motion to Quash the

Subpoena (Doc. 107) issued to TransUnion.

IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that the Subpoena issued to TransUnion is hereby

QUASHED.

DATED this 3rd day of March, 2008.

Case 2:05-cv-02460-SMM Document 116 Filed 03/03/08 Page 3 of 3