Source: s3://data.kl3m.ai/documents/govinfo/USCOURTS/USCOURTS-caed-1_04-cv-05077/USCOURTS-caed-1_04-cv-05077-14/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

1

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

LOUIS FRANCIS,

Plaintiff,

v.

H.L. BRYANT, et. al.

Defendants.

 /

CV F 04 5077 AWI SMS P 

ORDER VACATING HEARING SET FOR

NOVEMBER 6, 2006, 1:30 PM. 

ORDER STRIKING MOTION TO QUASH

FROM RECORD (Doc. 65.) 

ORDER DIRECTING CLERK OF COURT TO

“TERM” THIRD PARTY PLAINTIFF

ORDER DIRECTING CLERK OF COURT TO

SERVE COUNSEL FOR CDCR WITH COPY

OF THIS ORDER

 Louis Francis (“Plaintiff”) is a state prisoner proceeding pro se and in forma pauperis in

this civil rights action filed pursuant to 42 U.S.C. § 1983. 

On September 29, 2006, the California Department of Corrections and Rehabilitation

(“CDCR”) filed a Motion to Quash and/or Modify Rule 45 subpoenas and set the matter for

hearing before the Honorable Anthony W. Ishii on November 6, 2006, at 1:30 p.m. 

As a preliminary matter, pursuant to Local Rule 78-230(m), all motions filed in cases

wherein one party is incarcerated and proceeding in propria persona, “shall be submitted upon

the record without oral argument unless otherwise ordered by the court.” Local Rule 78-230(m).

Such motions need not be noticed on the motion calendar. Id. Further, the Local Rules provide

Case 1:04-cv-05077-LJO -SMS Document 72 Filed 10/05/06 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 Should the CDCR wish to file such pleadings in the future, it should choose to identify itself as a “movant” 1

in the CMECF system rather than a party to the action. 

2

that all discovery motions are to be heard by the Magistrate Judge and not the District Court

Judge. Local Rule 72-302(c)(1). Accordingly, the hearing set before Judge Anthony Ishii on

November 6, 2006, will be VACATED. 

The Court notes further that the CDCR has failed to serve the Plaintiff with a copy of the

Motion to Quash filed. Pursuant to the Local Rules and the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure, all

pleadings filed with the Court must be served on each of the parties to the case. Local Rule 5-

135(b); Fed.R.Civ.P. 5. 

In this case, no declaration of service was attached to the Motion to Quash filed on

September 29, 2006. It is possible that the CDCR believes that Plaintiff would be electronically

served because the pleading was electronically filed. However, the Local Rules specifically

require that persons not registered for electronic service (e.g. prisoners or pro se litigants) or have

not consented to receive electronic service, must be served conventionally. Local Rule 5-135(b). 

The Notice of electronic filing identifies the Plaintiff in this action as a party who must be

conventionally served. As the CDCR has failed to serve Plaintiff with a copy of the Motion to

Quash the subpoenas, Plaintiff has been deprived of his right to respond to the Motion. 

Accordingly, the Motion to Quash will be STRICKEN from the record. 

Finally, the Court notes that when the CDCR electronically filed its Motion to Quash the

Subpoenas, they listed themselves as a “Third Party Plaintiff.” However, no order joining the 1

CDCR as a party to this action has issued. This appears to be a mistake on the part of the CDCR. 

As such, the Court will DIRECT the Clerk of Court to “term” the CDCR as a party to the case

and will DIRECT the Clerk of Court to serve the CDCR on Court Orders issued pertaining to the

Motion to Quash. Plaintiff is also informed that when responding to pleadings filed by a third or

non-party, he must serve that party with a copy of the pleading by mail. 

Based on the above, the Court HEREBY ORDERS: 

1. The hearing set before the Honorable Anthony W. Ishii on November 6, 2006, is

VACATED; and 

Case 1:04-cv-05077-LJO -SMS Document 72 Filed 10/05/06 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

2. The Motion to Quash the Subpoenas filed September 29, 2006 (Doc. 65-1) is

Ordered STRICKEN from the record. 

3. The Clerk of Court is DIRECTED to “term” the CDCR as a Third Party Plaintiff

in this action. 

4. The Clerk of Court is DIRECTED to serve counsel for the CDCR with a copy of this

Order. 

IT IS SO ORDERED.

Dated: October 4, 2006 /s/ Sandra M. Snyder 

icido3 UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE

Case 1:04-cv-05077-LJO -SMS Document 72 Filed 10/05/06 Page 3 of 3