Hussein v. ERSEK et al
Filing
199
ORDERED that P's 178 Objection to the Magistrate Judge's order is DENIED. IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that the Magistrate Judge's 170 Order denying P's motion for sanctions is AFFIRMED. Signed by Judge Larry R. Hicks on 4/7/2010. (Copies have been distributed pursuant to the NEF - DRM)
<![CDATA[
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
1
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT DISTRICT OF NEVADA *** ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) )
HUSSEIN S. HUSSEIN, Plaintiffs, v. ADEL ERSEK; et al., Defendants.
3:07-cv-0056-LRH-VPC ORDER
Before the court is plaintiff Hussein S. Hussein's ("Hussein") objection to the magistrate judge's order denying his motions for contempt and to comply with a subpoena duces tecum (Doc. #1701). Doc. 178. Local Rule IB 3-1 authorizes a district judge to reconsider any pretrial matter referred to a magistrate judge pursuant to LR IB 1-3 where it has been shown that the magistrate judge's order is clearly erroneous or contrary to law. Here, Hussein objects to the magistrate's denial of his motion for contempt (Doc. #146) and his motion to comply with a subpoena (Doc. #122) arguing that the Department of Veteran's Affairs ("DVA") failed to produce documents in accordance with his legitimately issued subpoena. The magistrate denied Hussein's motions finding that, as a pro se plaintiff, he was without
Refers to the court's docket entry number.
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
authority to issue the subpoena without the court's endorsement. See Doc. #170; FE D . R. CIV. P. 45(a)(3). This order was not in error. Hussein, as a pro se plaintiff must request approval from the court to issue subpoenas, particularly against individuals or corporations like the Department of Veteran's Affairs who are neither a party to, nor involved in, the present matter. Accordingly, the court finds that Hussein has failed to show that the magistrate's order is either contrary to law or clearly erroneous and therefore, the court shall affirm the magistrate judge's order. IT IS THEREFORE ORDERED that plaintiff's objection to the magistrate judge's order (Doc. #178) is DENIED. IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that the magistrate judge's order denying plaintiff's motion for sanctions (Doc. #170) is AFFIRMED. IT IS SO ORDERED. DATED this 7th day of April, 2010.
__________________________________ LARRY R. HICKS UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE
2
]]>
Disclaimer: Justia Dockets & Filings provides public litigation records from the federal appellate and district courts. These filings and docket sheets should not be considered findings of fact or liability, nor do they necessarily reflect the view of Justia.
Why Is My Information Online?
