Document ID: s3://data.kl3m.ai/documents/govinfo/USCOURTS/USCOURTS-cand-3_06-cv-03209/USCOURTS-cand-3_06-cv-03209-10/pdf.json

Parties Involved:
College of Health & Human Services, San Francisco State University
Defendant
Julia Powell Keller-McIntyre
Plaintiff

Document Text:

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

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

JULIA POWELL KELLER-MCINTYRE,

Plaintiff,

v.

COLLEGE OF HEALTH & HUMAN

SERVICES, SAN FRANCISCO STATE

UNIVERSITY,

Defendant.

___________________________________/

No. C-06-3209 MMC (EMC)

ORDER DENYING PLAINTIFF’S

MOTION TO HOLD MARIA ALLAIN

IN CONTEMPT OF COURT

(Docket No. 79)

Plaintiff Julia Powell Keller-McIntyre has filed a motion to hold Maria Allain in contempt of

court. The Court hereby DENIES the motion without prejudice and VACATES the hearing on the

motion.

The relief sought by Ms. Keller-McIntyre is denied for now for several reasons. First, there

is no proof that Ms. Keller served a copy of this motion on Ms. Allain (or for that matter, on

Defendant the College of Health & Human Services). In other words, Ms. Allain may not be on

notice that a sanction is being sought against her. Second, even if Ms. Allain did receive notice of

the motion, the motion is defective because Ms. Keller-McIntyre failed to submit to the Court a copy

of the subpoena and proof that the subpoena was actually served on Ms. Allain. Although Ms.

Keller-McIntyre claims in her motion that she “politely gave Ms. Allain a subpoena,” she provides

no declaration, sworn under the penalty of perjury, that that is the case. In addition, there is no proof

that the College, a party to this action, received notice of the subpoena. See Fed. R. Civ. P. 45(b)(1)

(“Prior notice of any commanded production of documents and things [pursuant to a subpoena] . . .

Case 3:06-cv-03209-MMC Document 89 Filed 10/03/06 Page 1 of 2
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

2

shall be served on each party in the manner described by Rule 5(b).”); Fed. R. Civ. P. 30(b)(1) (“A

party desiring to take the deposition of any person upon oral examination shall give reasonable

notice in writing to every other party in the action.”).

Although the Court denies Ms. Keller-McIntyre’s motion, the denial is without prejudice so

that Ms. Keller-McIntyre is not barred from refiling the motion in the future. Should all the

requirements of service and proof of service be fulfilled. The Court notes, for Ms. KellerMcIntyre’s benefit, that if Ms. Allain is an employee of the College and the information she seeks

from Ms. Allain is in the possession, control, or custody of the College, she need not subpoena Ms.

Allain individually to get the information but rather may propound discovery requests directly to the

College. See “Handbook for Litigants Without a Lawyer” (enclosed via hard copy mailing), pp. 78-

80.

This order disposes of Docket No. 79.

IT IS SO ORDERED.

Dated: October 3, 2006

_________________________ EDWARD M. CHEN

United States Magistrate Judge

Case 3:06-cv-03209-MMC Document 89 Filed 10/03/06 Page 2 of 2