Michelin North America Inc v. Inter-City Tire and Auto Center Inc, No. 6:2013cv01067 - Document 330 (D.S.C. 2014)
Court Description: OPINION AND ORDER denying (329) Motion to Quash without prejudice in case 6:13-cv-01067-HMH; denying (249) Motion to Quash without prejudice in case 6:13-cv-02752-HMH. Signed by Honorable Henry M Herlong, Jr on 10/29/14.Associated Cases: 6:13-cv-01067-HMH, 6:13-cv-02752-HMH(sfla, ) Modified on 10/29/2014 to edit text(jtho, ).
Download PDF
<![CDATA[
Michelin North America Inc v. Inter-City Tire and Auto Center Inc Doc. 330 IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE DISTRICT OF SOUTH CAROLINA GREENVILLE DIVISION Michelin North America, Inc., and Michelin Retread Technologies, Inc., ) ) ) C.A. No. 6:13-1067-HMH Plaintiffs/Counterclaim Defendants, ) ) vs. ) ) Inter City Tire and Auto Center, Inc., and ) Inter City Retread, Inc., ) ) Defendants/Counterclaim Plaintiffs, ) ) vs. ) ) Service Tire Truck Centers, Inc., ) Tire Centers, LLC, James Cavanaugh, ) William McCabe, William Schafer, ) Andrew Meurer, and Marc Pasquet, ) ) Counterclaim Defendants. ) _____________________________________________________________________________ Inter City Tire and Auto Center, Inc. and. Inter City Retread, Inc., Plaintiffs, vs. Michelin North America, Inc., Michelin Retread Technologies, Inc., Service Tire Truck Center, Inc., James Cavanaugh William McCabe and Oscar Simoes, Defendants. ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) C.A. No. 6:13-2752-HMH OPINION & ORDER Dockets.Justia.com This matter is before the court on Defendant/Counterclaim Defendant James Cavanaugh s ( Cavanaugh ) pro se motion to quash a subpoena allegedly issued from this court by Defendants/Counterclaim Plaintiffs Inter City Tire and Auto Center, Inc. and Inter City Retread, Inc. (collectively Inter City ). Cavanaugh did not attach the subpoena described in the motion to his filing. See (Mot. Quash, ECF No. 329.)1 Rule 45(d)(3) of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure provides that motions to quash must be filed in the court for the district where compliance is required. See Fed. R. Civ. P. 45(d)(3)(A)-(B). Any motion to quash Inter City s subpoena should have been filed in the district where compliance is required. Because Cavanaugh did not attach the subpoena to his motion, the court is unable to evaluate whether it has jurisdiction to consider the motion. Accordingly, Cavanaugh s motion to quash is denied without prejudice. It is therefore ORDERED that Cavanaugh s motion to quash, docket number 329, is denied without prejudice. IT IS SO ORDERED. s/Henry M. Herlong, Jr. Senior United States District Judge Greenville, South Carolina October 29, 2014 1 All citations in ECF refer to C.A. No. 6:13-cv-1067. 2
]]>
Some case metadata and case summaries were written with the help of AI, which can produce inaccuracies. You
should read the full case before relying on it for legal research purposes.
This site is protected by reCAPTCHA and the Google
Privacy Policy and
Terms of Service apply.
