Source: s3://data.kl3m.ai/documents/govinfo/USCOURTS/USCOURTS-cand-4_13-cv-04343/USCOURTS-cand-4_13-cv-04343-1/pdf.json

Nature of Suit Code: 442
Nature of Suit: Civil Rights Employment
Cause of Action: 28:1332 Diversity-Petition for Removal

---

United States District Court

For the Northern District of California

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

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

FOR THE NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

TANH THENBOUAPHA,

Plaintiff,

v.

OFFICE DEPOT, INC.

Defendant.

________________________________/

No. C 13-04343 CW

ORDER DENYING MOTION TO 

HAVE U.S. MARSHAL SERVE 

DEPOSITION SUBPOENA 

(Docket No. 38)

This matter comes before the Court on Plaintiff's motion to 

have the United States Marshal serve a deposition subpoena on 

Pamela Williams, a non-party witness. (Docket No. 38). Ms. 

Williams apparently resides in Patterson, California, a community 

in Stanislaus County and outside the Northern District of 

California. In an order dated January 14, 2015, this Court 

instructed Plaintiff to provide legal authority for the request. 

Plaintiff filed a memorandum in which he cites 28 U.S.C. § 566 for 

the proposition that the Marshal "shall execute all lawful writs, 

process, and orders issued under the authority of the United 

States . . . ." However, missing from Plaintiff's filing is any 

statute authorizing the Court to order the Marshal to serve a 

deposition subpoena, or, to state it differently, any statutory 

authority that ensures a Court order to that effect is a "lawful" 

order "under the authority of the United States." This is 

particularly problematic in that Plaintiff wishes the Court to 

order service outside the Northern District of California. It is 

not clear which District's Marshal, if either, could be ordered to 

Case 4:13-cv-04343-CW Document 41 Filed 02/03/15 Page 1 of 2
United States District Court

For the Northern District of California

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

serve it. Plaintiff has not cited, and the Court is not aware of,

any authority for the order he requests. As such, Plaintiff's 

motion is DENIED.

IT IS SO ORDERED. 

Dated: February 3, 2015 CLAUDIA WILKEN

United States District Judge

Case 4:13-cv-04343-CW Document 41 Filed 02/03/15 Page 2 of 2