(PC)Payne v. Lim ( 2022 )

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 8 FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA 9 10 JAVANCE ROSS PAYNE, No. 2:20-cv-01231 DB P 11 Plaintiff, 12 v. ORDER 13 JAMES T. LIM, 14 Defendant. 15 16 Plaintiff, a state prisoner proceeding pro se with a civil rights action, has filed a civil 17 rights action pursuant to 42 U.S.C. § 1983. Plaintiff claims defendant was deliberately indifferent 18 to plaintiff’s serious medical needs in violation of plaintiff’s Eighth Amendment rights. Plaintiff 19 has requested the issuance of subpoenas so that plaintiff may acquire medical records relevant to 20 the present action. (ECF No. 31.) 21 I. Motion for Subpoenas 22 Plaintiff requests that the court provide him with “three blank subpoena forms to subpoena 23 medical records.” (ECF No. 31 at 1.) Plaintiff states that he wishes to subpoena portions of his 24 medical records. (Id.) Specifically, plaintiff seeks X-ray photographs from 2019 contained in his 25 medical file. (Id.) In his motion, plaintiff states that he “had already ask [sic] medical for my 26 xray” but that his request was denied as he did not have an attorney. (Id.) Given that defendant 27 Lim is the only defendant in this action, it appears that plaintiff is requesting that issuance of a 28 third-party subpoenas duces tecum. 1 II. Legal Standards 2 A non-party may be compelled to produce documents for inspection and copying pursuant 3 to a subpoena duces tecum. See Fed. R. Civ. P. 34(c), 45(a). Subject to certain requirements, a 4 plaintiff is entitled to the issuance of a subpoena commanding the production of documents, 5 electronically stored information, and/or tangible things from a nonparty, Fed. R. Civ. P. 45, and 6 to service of the subpoena by the United States Marshal, 28 U.S.C. § 1915(d). A court may grant 7 such a request only after a plaintiff has shown that the documents or items sought from the 8 nonparty are not obtainable from the defendants through a request for the production of 9 documents, electronically stored information, and/or tangible things. Fed. R. Civ. P. 34. A 10 motion for issuance of a subpoena duces tecum should be supported by clear identification of the 11 documents sought and a showing that the records are obtainable only through the identified third- 12 party. See, e.g., Davis v. Ramen, 1:06-cv-1216 AWI SKO PC, 2010 WL 1948560, at *1 (E.D. 13 Cal. May 11, 2010); Williams v. Adams, No. 1:05-cv-0124 AWI SMS PC, 2010 WL 148703, at 14 *1 (E.D. Cal. Jan. 14, 2010). 15 III. Discussion 16 Plaintiff has filed a motion to subpoena of items contained in his medical records. Based 17 on the limited information contained in the motion, it appears that these documents may be 18 relevant to the present action. However, plaintiff has not shown that these records are only 19 obtainable via issuance of a subpoena. Inmates are typically able to access their own medical 20 records. Plaintiff must ensure that he has properly pursued available avenues prior to a subpoena 21 being issued. Fed. R. Civ. P. 34. Additionally, plaintiff has not clearly identified for the court the 22 exact documents sought and the third-party who possesses them. 23 Given the above, plaintiff’s motion (ECF No. 31) will be denied. However, should 24 plaintiff find that he is unable to obtain these records through the means available to him, he may 25 file a renewed motion requesting the court issue third-party subpoena duces tecum. In doing so, 26 he must ensure that any such motion complies with the rules described above and any other 27 applicable law. 28 //// 1 IV. Conclusion 2 For the reasons set forth above, IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that plaintiffs motion for 3 | third-party subpoena (ECF No. 31) is denied without prejudice. 4 | Dated: September 1, 2022 5 6 4 ‘BORAH BARNES UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE 8 9 10 11 DB:14 12 | DB/DB Prisoner Inbox/Civil Rights/R/payn1231.3psubp 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28