Can you send a Federal subpoena

[zenoMorph]

What is the name of your state? UT

Can you send a federal subpoena via USPS with signature required vs the whole process server / sheriff angle which is expensive?

There are some 3rd party companies that have information that may help my case but its not like the smoking gun evidence.

Are there inexpensive ways of sending that Subpoena such as via USPS? I believe when the court is trying to select a Jury for trial, they use USPS and don't have things delivered via a process server or sheriff.

Thanks.

 

[quincy]

Read Rule 45 of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure. I provided a link to the Rules for you in one of your other threads.

 

[Zigner]

Please don't make new threads for every question that pops up in your head. Pick a thread and stick to it.

 

[zenoMorph]

Please don't make new threads for every question that pops up in your head. Pick a thread and stick to it.

Quote what law you are referring to saying that only 1 post is allowed per user or else I will file Chapter 11(b) sanctions against you.

Different post cover different topics and issues.

 

[zenoMorph]

Read Rule 45 of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure. I provided a link to the Rules for you in one of your other threads.

"(1) By Whom and How; Tendering Fees. Any person who is at least 18 years old and not a party may serve a subpoena. Serving a subpoena requires delivering a copy to the named person..... "

So yes?

 

[Zigner]

Quote what law you are referring to saying that only 1 post is allowed per user or else I will file Chapter 11(b) sanctions against you.

You were not told that only one post was allowed per person. Here is the text of the post that you reported:

Please don't make new threads for every question that pops up in your head. Pick a thread and stick to it.

Keep reporting posts for no good reason and you won't be an active member here much longer.

 

[zenoMorph]

You were not told that only one post was allowed per person. Here is the text of the post that you reported:

Please don't make new threads for every question that pops up in your head. Pick a thread and stick to it.

Keep reporting posts for no good reason and you won't be an active member here much longer.

You have falsely accused me of reposing posts. This indicates that I have posted asking about if you can use USPS to deliver a subpoena. Yet this is the first and only time I have ever posted this question.

I have also been thinking about posting this question for at least 2 months and it did not "pop in my head" as you would put it.

If you are not going to answer my question, then what is your purpose? Harassment?

Watch what say or you might find liable and slander added to the complaint against you.

 

[Zigner]

I never accused you of "reposing posts". I never indicated that you posted about if you can use USPS to deliver a subpoena. I agree that this is the first and only time you have ever posted this question (on this forum).

There, now that that's cleared up.....

Please don't make a new thread for every question that pops in to your head (no matter the time frame). Pick a thread and stick to it.

 

[quincy]

zenoMorph, there is no law against making several threads. It is a FreeAdvice forum member preference that visitors to this site keep all of their related questions to a single thread. It is easier on forum members to have all of the information about a poster's legal concern nicely in one place.

The subpoena should be personally served - unless your local rules permit registered or certified mail service.

https://www.usmarshals.gov/process/civil-subpoena.htm

 

[zenoMorph]

I never accused you of "reposing posts". I never indicated that you posted about if you can use USPS to deliver a subpoena. I agree that this is the first and only time you have ever posted this question (on this forum).

There, now that that's cleared up...

Please don't make a new thread for every question that pops in to your head (no matter the time frame). Pick a thread and stick to it.

So you are implying that I run around posted this same topic on multiple forums? False light in tort defamation much? Put your money where you mouth is and find me the another forum that I asked this question? I hope you know I have taken screen shots of your comments and noted your IP address. Unless you are using a VPN right now, I would suggest you strongly consider how you proceed.

 

[zenoMorph]

zenoMorph, there is no law against making several threads. It is a FreeAdvice forum member preference that visitors to this site keep all of their related questions to a single thread. It is easier on forum members to have all of the information about a poster's legal concern nicely in one place.

The subpoena should be personally served - unless your local rules permit registered or certified mail service.

https://www.usmarshals.gov/process/civil-subpoena.htm

Lets say for example that I am serving a subpoena to Comcast to get information on Zigner's IP address in federal court. That should be personally served?

Here is the thing, there are a lot of companies that might have about 1% of the evidence I need. These are big tech companies. The link you posted also said " Served By: A subpoena may be served by any person who is not a party and is at least 18 years of age "

The companies I am talking about are 3rd party companies that have very small amount of needed information.


In the interest of keeping down cost, please tell me why I could not send it via USPS when the rules say that " Served By: A subpoena may be served by any person who is not a party and is at least 18 years of age " ?

I realize it does not have the same threatening pretense of having a man in uniform knocking your door down to shove a subpoena in your face but when you are talking billion dollar tech companies that probably get hundred of these things a day and have entire departments setup for this sole purpose. Why not send USPS with return signature?

 

[Taxing Matters]

FRCP 45(b)(1) states:

(1) By Whom and How; Tendering Fees. Any person who is at least 18 years old and not a party may serve a subpoena. Serving a subpoena requires delivering a copy to the named person and, if the subpoena requires that person's attendance, tendering the fees for 1 day's attendance and the mileage allowed by law. Fees and mileage need not be tendered when the subpoena issues on behalf of the United States or any of its officers or agencies.

That rule requires that the person doing the service personally deliver the subpoena to the person named in the subpoena and precludes service by mail. So holds the majority of federal courts that have considered the matter:

A majority of courts have held that Rule 45 requires personal service of subpoenas. FTC v. Compagnie De Saint–Gobain–Pont–A–Mousson, 636 F.2d 1300, 1312–1313 (D.C.Cir.1980) (holding that rule does not permit any form of mail service and that compulsory process may be served upon an unwilling witness only in person); Terre Haute Warehousing Serv., Inc. v. Grinnell Fire Protection Sys. Co., 193 F.R.D. 561, 563 (S.D.Ind.1999) (holding that certified mail is insufficient method of service); Smith v. Midland Brake, Inc., 162 F.R.D. 683, 686 (D.Kan.1995) (same); In re Nathurst, 183 B.R. 953, 954–955 (Bankr.M.D.Fla.1995) (same); In re Smith, 126 F.R.D. 461, 462 (E.D.N.Y.1989) (holding that district court lacked discretion under rule to permit alternative service); In re Johnson & Johnson, 59 F.R.D. 174, 177 (D.Del.1973) (determining that personal service of individuals required).

Notwithstanding the force of authority requiring personal service under Rule 45, Plaintiff has not demonstrated that he has expended any effort whatsoever to identify the Defendants or to serve the subpoenas upon the ISPs and, thus, his assertion that the costs are prohibitive and beyond his means is mere speculation. Nevertheless, Rule 45 requires personal service of subpoenas and, for that reason, Plaintiff's motion for leave to serve subpoenas by certified mail is denied.

Parker v. John Doe #1, No. CIV.A. 02-7215, 2002 WL 32107937, at *2 (E.D. Pa. Nov. 21, 2002)(bolding added).

Furthermore, the practical considerations involved work against service by mail. That server must then complete an certificate of service and must be willing and available to testify in court should there be a controversy over the service. The USPS is not going to undertake to do all that for you. And a certified or registered mail receipt is not sufficient to substitute for the affidavit of service because it is not a statement signed by the person making the service attesting that the service was completed. And the carrier delivering it is not going to verify identify of person served and complete the certificate of service, nor will the USPS allow the carrier to testify for you regarding service should you need it.

So you don't need a sheriff or marshal to do the service; there are lots of process server businesses out there that can do it for you for relatively modest fees. Or you can have a friend or relative do it for you if they won't mess it up and can do the certificate of service properly. But using the mail does not meet what the rule requires.

 

[Taxing Matters]

Lets say for example that I am serving a subpoena to Comcast to get information on Zigner's IP address in federal court. That should be personally served?

Yes. The case I quoted from in my previous reply was exactly that situation: the plaintiff sought to subpoena huge corporate ISPs to get identifying information from them and wanted to do it by certified mail. As you can see in the last sentence of the opinion that I bolded, the court said personal service is required and denied plaintiff's request to serve by certified mail.

 

[quincy]

So you are implying that I run around posted this same topic on multiple forums? False light in tort defamation much? Put your money where you mouth is and find me the another forum that I asked this question? I hope you know I have taken screen shots of your comments and noted your IP address. Unless you are using a VPN right now, I would suggest you strongly consider how you proceed.

zenoMorph, please refrain from now on from verbally threatening any of the members of this forum with baseless lawsuits.

Thank you.

You will need to find a way to personally serve the party with the subpoena.

 

[cbg]

Okay, I'll try.

Zeno-Morph, on FA you have posted three different threads so far. All of them appear to relate to the same lawsuit. It is easier for the responders to provide you with accurate information if you keep all questions about the same issue in one thread, rather than starting a new thread for each question. It is not a law or a rule, but it is a preference, and it benefits you to follow it since you will get better and more accurate information if you do, since responders will be less likely to miss information that may have been provided in another thread.