DISTRICT COURT OF THE VIRGIN ISLANDS
DIVISION OF ST. CROIX
5
JUAN MENDEZ, RENE VARGAS, FRANK
5
REYNALDO RODRIGUEZ, and JAIME
5
GARCIA,
5
2002-CV-0169
5
Plaintiffs,
5
v.
5
5
HOVENSA, L.L.C.,
5
5
Defendant.
5
__________________________________________5
TO:
Lee J. Rohn, Esq.
Onik’a Gilliam, Esq.
ORDER DENYING DEFENDANT’S MOTION TO QUASH
THIS MATTER is before the Court for consideration upon Defendant HOVENSA,
L.L.C.’s Motion to Quash (Docket No. 378).  Plaintiffs filed an opposition to said motion.
A hearing was held March 18, 2008.
Defendant’s motion seeks to quash a subpoena issued by Plaintiffs to the Virgin
Islands Department of Licensing and Consumer Affairs requesting documents concerning
Jim Warren.  Despite counsel for Defendant’s vigorous argument that Fed. R. Civ. P.
45(c)(3)(A) is silent regarding who may move to quash, courts have consistently held that,
“[o]rdinarily, only the non-parties whom were served with the subpoenas may move to
Case: 1:02-cv-00169-TJS   Document #: 387   Filed: 03/18/08   Page 1 of 3
Mendez v. HOVENSA, L.L.C
2002-CV-0169
Order Denying Defendant’s Motion to Quash
Page 2
have them quashed under Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 45(c)(3)(A).”  Davis v. General
Accident Ins. Co. of America, No. Civ. A. 98-4736, 1999 WL 228944 at *2 (E.D. Pa. April 15,
1999) (citations omitted).  See, also, e.g., Doe v. United States, Civil Action No. 06-95 Erie, 2007
WL 1521550 at *4 (W.D. Pa. May 23, 2007) (where the court states, “Ordinarily a party lacks
standing to seek to quash a subpoena issued to a non-party unless the party claims a right
or privilege with regard to the documents sought” (emphasis in original) (citations
omitted)).  An exception does exist, “however, where a party ‘claims some personal right
or privilege in respect to the subject matter of a subpoena duces tecum directed to a
nonparty.’” Davis, 1999 WL 228944 at *2 (quoting Dart Indus., Inc. v. Liquid Nitrogen Proc.
Corp. of Cal., 50 F.R.D. 286, 291 (D. Del. 1970)).
In the matter at bar, Defendant has not asserted any personal right or privilege with
respect to documents concerning Jim Warren.  Consequently, the Court finds that
Defendant lacks standing to move to quash the subpoena issued to the Virgin Islands
Department of Licensing and Consumer Affairs, a non-party.
Accordingly, it is hereby ORDERED that Defendant HOVENSA, L.L.C.’s Motion
to Quash (Docket No. 378) is DENIED.
Case: 1:02-cv-00169-TJS   Document #: 387   Filed: 03/18/08   Page 2 of 3
Mendez v. HOVENSA, L.L.C
2002-CV-0169
Order Denying Defendant’s Motion to Quash
Page 3
ENTER:
Dated: March 18, 2008
                                /s/                                   
GEORGE W. CANNON, JR.
U.S. MAGISTRATE JUDGE
Case: 1:02-cv-00169-TJS   Document #: 387   Filed: 03/18/08   Page 3 of 3