(PC) Long v. Corizon Health, Inc.

• Court: District Court, E.D. California
• Decided: December 20, 2019
• Docket: 1:17-cv-00898
• Status: Unknown

Opinion

8 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

9 EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

11 PHILLIP J. LONG, CASE NO. 1:17-cv-0898-LJO-JLT (PC) 12 Plaintiff, ORDER VACATING FINDINGS AND 13 RECOMMENDATIONS; AND v. 14 ORDER GRANTING MOTION FOR CORIZON HEALTH, INC., et al., SUBPOENA 15 Defendants. (Docs. 18, 20) 16

17 This action proceeds against a single Jane Doe defendant on an Eighth Amendment 18 medical indifference claim. (Docs. 11, 12.) Previously, the Court granted Plaintiff an extended 19 period to identify Jane Doe, directing Plaintiff to file a notice of substitution once she has been 20 identified. The Court also informed Plaintiff that if he failed to comply with the directive, the 21 Court would recommend that this action be dismissed. When that ninety-day period passed 22 without notice by Plaintiff, the Court issued findings and recommendations to dismiss this action 23 without prejudice for failure to comply with a court order and failure to prosecute. Plaintiff has 24 since filed objections to the findings and recommendations. Good cause appearing, the findings 25 and recommendations will be vacated 26 Plaintiff has also filed a motion for a subpoena directed to Jane Doe’s employer at the 27 time of the incident underlying this action, Corizon Health. The Court’s authorization of a 28 1 subpoena duces tecum requested by an in forma pauperis plaintiff is subject to limitations. 2 Because personal service of a subpoena duces tecum is required, Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 3 45(b), “[d]irecting the Marshal's Office to expend its resources personally serving a subpoena is 4 not taken lightly by the court,” Austin v. Winett, 2008 WL 5213414, *1 (E.D. Cal. 2008); 28 5 U.S.C. § 1915(d). Limitations include the relevance of the information sought as well as the 6 burden and expense to the non-party in providing the requested information. Fed. R. Civ. P. 26, 7 45. A motion for issuance of a subpoena duces tecum should be supported by clear identification 8 of the documents sought and a showing that the records are obtainable only through the identified 9 third party. See, e.g., Davis v. Ramen, 2010 WL 1948560, *1 (E.D. Cal. 2010); Williams v. 10 Adams, 2010 WL 148703, *1 (E.D. Cal. 2010). The “Federal Rules of Civil Procedure were not 11 intended to burden a non-party with a duty to suffer excessive or unusual expenses in order to 12 comply with a subpoena duces tecum.” Badman v. Stark, 139 F.R.D. 601, 605 (M.D. Pa. 1991). 13 Non-parties are “entitled to have the benefit of this Court's vigilance” in considering these factors. 14 Id. 15 Plaintiff’s motion and the allegations in the pleading are sufficiently specific as to the 16 information sought: a female nurse who was employed by Corizon Health and worked at the 17 Fresno County Jail on July 8, 2016. The identity of this individual is critical for plaintiff to 18 proceed with this action. The motion, however, fails to provide an address for service on Corizon 19 Health, and plaintiff indicates that he is unable to locate one using the limited resources available 20 to him at the institution where he is housed. As a one-time courtesy, the Court will provide the 21 publicly-available address of the registered agent for service of process for this entity. In the 22 event this is the incorrect address, plaintiff will be directed to utilize whatever means that are 23 available to him to locate the correct address. If he is unable to do so, this action may be subject 24 to dismissal pursuant to Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 4(m). Accordingly, the Court ORDERS 25 as follows: 26 1. The findings and recommendations to dismiss this action (Doc. 18) are VACATED; 27 2. Plaintiff’s motion for subpoena (Doc. 20) is GRANTED; 28 1 3. The Clerk of Court shall forward the following documents to the United States 2 Marshal (USM): 3 a. One completed and issued subpoena duces tecum to be served on: 4 JILL P. MOLDREM 5 Corizon Health, Inc. 6 c/o Custodian of Records 7 103 Powell Court 8 Brentwood, TN 37027 9 b. One copy of the second amended complaint (Doc. 9); 10 c. One completed USM–285 form; and 11 d. Two copies of this order, one to accompany the subpoena and one for the 12 USM; 13 4. In completing the subpoena, the Clerk of Court shall list, as described here, the 14 documents requested: Documents identifying the name of Jane Doe, who, as described 15 in the second amended complaint, is a female nurse or healthcare provider who 16 worked at the Fresno County Jail on July 8, 2016. 17 5. Within twenty days from the date of this order, the USM is DIRECTED to serve the 18 subpoena in accordance with the provisions of Rule 45 of the Federal Rules of Civil 19 Procedure; 20 6. The USM shall make personal service of the subpoena duces tecum, along with a copy 21 of this order and a copy of the second amended complaint, upon the individual/entity 22 named in the subpoena pursuant to Rule 45 of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure 23 and 28 U.S.C. § 566(c); 24 7. Within ten days after personal service is made, the USM shall file the return of 25 service, along with the costs subsequently incurred in effecting service, and said costs 26 shall be enumerated on the USM–285 form; and 27 8. Within thirty days after service is made, the Custodian of Records at Corizon Health, 28 1 Inc. is directed to serve the responsive documents on plaintiff: 2 Phillip J. Long 3 BJ-2973 4 Ironwood State Prison (“ISP-2) 5 P.O. Box 2199 6 Blythe, CA 92226-2199 7 9. Within fourteen days upon receipt of the documents identifying Jane Doe, plaintiff is 8 directed to submit a notice with the Court, upon which he will then be directed to 9 submit documents necessary to effectuate service. 10 IT IS SO ORDERED. 11 12 Dated: December 20, 2019 /s/ Jennifer L. Thurston UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE 13

14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28