United States District Court, D. Hawaii
ORDER GRANTING PETITIONER'S MOTION FOR
ATTORNEYS' FEES AND COSTS
S.C. Chang United States Magistrate Judge.
the Court is Petitioner Starr Adjustment Services, Inc.'s
(“Starr”) Motion for Attorneys' Fees and
Costs, filed July 12, 2017. On July 26, 2017, Starr filed a
Statement of Consultation, representing that Respondent
Katrina Rucker did not respond to its request for
consultation. On July 28, 2017, Plaintiff filed a
“Certificate of Service: Response to Starr's
Request for Phone Conference” in Rucker v. Air
Ventures Hawaii, LLC, Civil No. 16-00492 KSC, the civil
action to which this miscellaneous case relates. Civil No.
16-00492 KSC, Doc. No. 118. The response, improperly filed
and incorrectly submitted in Rucker, stated:
I am currently in the middle of preparing for an April 2018
District Court trial, and as I am also recovering from a
concussion, I can not [sic] assist you with a phone
conference at this time. I will be available on June 22, 2018
at 12pm (pacific standard time).
did not file an opposition to Starr's Motion. After
careful consideration of Starr's submissions and the
applicable law, the Court HEREBY GRANTS the Motion for the
reasons stated below.
Rucker, by letter dated April 19, 2017, Ms. Rucker
submitted a “formal application request for the
attached six(6) subpoenas needed for immediate serving,
” which included a subpoena addressed to “Shari
Thompson/Star Companies Insurance”. Civil No. 16-00492
KSC, Doc. No. 86. The Clerk of Court responded on April 24,
2017, and returned the subject subpoena to Plaintiff because
it did not include Plaintiff's contact information. Civil
No. 16-00492 KSC, Doc. No. 87. In her response, the Clerk of
Court advised Plaintiff that she may resubmit the subject
subpoena for issuance after providing the requisite
around April 24, 2017, Starr received the subject subpoena.
April 28, 2017, Starr filed a Motion to Quash Subpoena Dated
April 18, 2017.
28, 2017, this Court issued an Order Granting (1)
Defendants' Motion to Quash Plaintiff's Subpoenas
Dated April 14, 2017 and (2) Starr Adjustment Services,
Inc.'s Motion to Quash Subpoena Dated April 18, 2017
(“Order”). Doc. No. 10. The Court quashed the
subject subpoena, along with others, because Ms. Rucker
failed to obtain the signature of the Clerk of Court; she
failed to personally serve the subpoenas; and the subpoenas
were unduly burdensome and provided insufficient time to
presently requests $4, 802.50 in attorneys' fees and
$46.00 in costs against Ms. Rucker as a sanction
for her violation of Federal Rules of Civil Procedure
(“FRCP”) 26(g)(1)(B) and 45(d)(1). FRCP 45(d)(1)
A party or attorney responsible for issuing and serving a
subpoena must take reasonable steps to avoid imposing undue
burden or expense on a person subject to the subpoena. The
court for the district where compliance is required must
enforce this duty and impose an appropriate sanction--which
may include lost earnings and reasonable attorney's
fees--on a party or attorney who fails to comply.
Civ. P. 45(d)(1). FRCP 45(d)(1) sanctions are discretionary,
Legal Voice v. Stormans, Inc., 738 F.3d 1178, 1185
(9th Cir. 2013), and “courts have discretion over the
type and degree of sanction imposed.” Mount Hope
Church v. Bash Back!, 705 F.3d 418, 425 (9th Cir. 2012).
One form ...