Document ID: s3://data.kl3m.ai/documents/govinfo/USCOURTS/USCOURTS-caed-1_06-cv-01368/USCOURTS-caed-1_06-cv-01368-6/pdf.json

Parties Involved:
Lowell Baisden
Defendant
United States of America
Plaintiff

Document Text:

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

McGREGOR W. SCOTT

United States Attorney

JACQUELINE C. BROWN

Member, New York Bar

Trial Attorney, Tax Division

U.S. Department of Justice

Post Office Box 7238

Ben Franklin Station

Washington, D.C. 20044

Telephone: (202) 616-9482

Attorneys for Plaintiff, United States

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE

EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, ) Civil No. 1:06-cv-01368

)

Plaintiff, ) Order on Defendant’s Motion

) to Quash Plaintiff’s

v. ) Bank Subpoenas

)

LOWELL BAISDEN, )

)

Defendant. )

_______________________________________ )

This matter is before the Court on a Motion by the defendant, Lowell Baisden

(“Defendant”) to quash three subpoenas issued by plaintiff, United States of America

(“Plaintiff”) to Wells Fargo Bank, Bank of the Sierra, and United Security Bank seeking

Defendant’s banking information. The Court held a hearing by telephone on October 17, 2007

on the matter, during which it heard arguments by counsel for Plaintiff and counsel for

Defendant.

Upon reviewing the pleadings and documents submitted by both parties, the Court finds

that the bank records sought by Plaintiff are discoverable because they are relevant to several

material issues in the case. The bank records are not subject to any recognized privilege or

exception, and Defendant’s claims of privacy do not constitute a privilege preventing the

Case 1:06-cv-01368-AWI-MJS Document 111 Filed 11/01/07 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 Order on Def.’s Motion to Quash 2 - 2 - 1:06-cv-01368-OWW-TAG

disclosure of the requested records to Plaintiff in this action. Lastly, the subpoenas are not overly

broad or oppressive; they are sufficiently limited in time and scope and pose no undue burden to

Defendant because they were issued to third-party banks. For the reasons given at the hearing

and summarized above, Defendant’s Motion to Quash the bank subpoenas issued to the Sierra

Bank, Wells Fargo Bank, and United Security bank is DENIED.

The Court also has before it Defendant’s request for a protective order. For the reasons

enumerated in the hearing, Defendant’s Motion for a Protective Order is GRANTED. Counsel

for Plaintiff and counsel for Defendant are to meet and confer forthwith regarding the form of the

protective order, and are to submit a stipulated or proposed form of protective order for the

Court’s consideration no later than November 8, 2007.

IT IS SO ORDERED.

Dated: November 1, 2007 /s/ Theresa A. Goldner 

j6eb3d UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE 

Case 1:06-cv-01368-AWI-MJS Document 111 Filed 11/01/07 Page 2 of 2