Warren v. Dollar Tree. AL. ( 2024 )

1 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 2 DISTRICT OF NEVADA 3 * * * 4 ALLANNA WARREN, Case No. 2:23-cv-01377-APG-EJY 5 Plaintiff, ORDER 6 v. 7 DOLLAR TREE, 8 Defendant. 9 10 Pending before the Court is Plaintiff’s Federal Rule of Civil Procedure Rule 45 Subpoena, 11 styled as a motion on the docket, seeking production of document from Defendant. ECF No. 58. The 12 Court exercises its inherent authority to manage discovery and control its docket rather than require 13 wasteful motion practice that is contrary to Rule 1 of the Federal Rules. 14 A Rule 45 subpoena “cannot be used to circumvent Rule 34 or the other discovery 15 rules.” McCall v. State Farm Mut. Auto. Ins. Co., 2:16-cv-01058-JAD-GWF, 2017 WL 3174914, 16 *6 (D. Nev. 2017). Rule 34 of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure allows for one party to request 17 documents from another party. A request for production of documents is the proper and the primary 18 way to obtain documents from an opposing party. 8A Charles Alan Wright et al., Federal Practice 19 and Procedure § 2204 at 365 (2nd ed. 1994), (Rule 45 should not be allowed when it circumvents 20 the requirements and protections of Rule 34). 21 Accordingly, IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that Plaintiff’s Rule 45 subpoena is quashed and 22 the docket is to reflect ECF No. 58 is DENIED. 23 Dated this 9th day of February, 2024. 24 25 ELAYNA J. YOUCHAH 26 UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE 27