ATS Products, Inc. v. Champion Fiberglass, Inc.
District Court, N.D. California
1Opinion of the Court
ORDER ON HOPKINS & CARLEY’S MOTION TO QUASH
Donna M. Ryu, United States Magistrate Judge
On July 2, 2015, third party Hopkins & Carley, a Law Corporation (“Hopkins & Car-ley”) filed a motion to quash the subpoena issued by Plaintiff ATS Products, Inc. (“ATS”) demanding the deposition of John V. Picone III, a Hopkins & Carley attorney. [Docket No. 116.] Plaintiff opposes the motion. [Docket No. 122.] The court finds this motion is appropriate for resolution without hearing pursuant to Civil Local Rule 7-l(b). For the following reasons, the motion to quash is denied.
I. Background
A. Description of…
2Cases cited5 opinions
- Shelton v. American Motors Corp.Court of Appeals for the Eighth Circuit · 1986
- Moon v. SCP Pool Corp.District Court, C.D. California · 2005
- Gonzales v. Google, Inc.District Court, D. North Carolina · 2006
- Oxy Resources California LLC v. Superior CourtCalifornia Court of Appeal · 2004
- Citizens for Ceres v. Superior CourtCalifornia Court of Appeal · 2013
3Cited by45 opinions
- Affinity Credit Union v. Apple Inc.District Court, N.D. California · 2024
- Appel v. WolfDistrict Court, S.D. California · 2021
- Appel v. WolfDistrict Court, S.D. California · 2021
- B.L.S. v. Walnut Creek School DistrictDistrict Court, N.D. California · 2026
- Century International Arms Incorporated v. XTech Tactical LLCDistrict Court, D. Arizona · 2020
40 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.