Banga v. Kanios

7 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 8 NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA NAVJEET SINGH BANGA, 10 Case No. 16-cv-04270-RS Plaintiff, v. ORDER GRANTING IN PART AND 12 DENYING IN PART MOTION TO CHRIS GUS KANIOS, et al., QUASH Defendants.

15 Plaintiff Navjeet Banga moves to quash Defendants’ subpoena requesting he (1) testify at trial and (2) produce various categories of documents. First, Banga contends it would be unduly burdensome to have to testify at trial given he is proceeding pro se in this matter. Banga, however, will be present throughout the upcoming bench trial and has previously represented he intends to testify during his own case-in-chief. In the event Defendants request he testify at trial, Banga’s motion to quash Defendants’ subpoena is denied.1 Moreover, Banga’s pro se status does not excuse him from otherwise following all applicable court rules.

22 Second, Banga moves to quash Defendants’ subpoena to the extent it requests that he produce a number of documents. Defendants’ document requests are extremely broad. See, e.g., Dkt. 557-2, at 6 (requesting “[a]ny and all DOCUMENTS that evidence, REFER or RELATE to any COMMUNICATIONS YOU had with any PERSON regarding YOUR enrollment as a student Unrelated to any subpoena, Banga is instructed to email to Defendants—no later than 5:00 pm on Friday, February 23rd—a copy of the testimony he plans to give on his own behalf during at JFKU”). Fact discovery in this action closed on December 6, 2019, and Defendants appear to be attempting to gain additional discovery by requesting large numbers of documents via trial subpoena. See nSight, Inc. v. Peoplesoft, Inc., 2006 WL 988807, at *3 (N.D. Cal. Apr. 13, 2006) (trial subpoenas may secure documents under specific, limited circumstances). Banga’s motion to quash is granted with respect to Defendants’ document production requests.

7 || ITISSO ORDERED.

9 Dated: February 20, 2024 RICHARD SEEBORG 11 Chief United States District Judge

© = 17 Z 18 28 ORDER CASE No. 16-cv-04270-RS