Cox
Cox v. The Summit at Turtle Ridge Community Association
Opinion
Trial Court Opinion
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA
ALVIN COX, Case No. 24-cv-03270-VC
Appellant,
ORDER DENYING MOTION FOR
v. ATTORNEYS' FEES
THE SUMMIT AT TURTLE RIDGE Re: Dkt. No.
COMMUNITY ASSOCIATION,
Appellee.
The motion for attorneys’ fees is denied. There is no indication that the appeal or the underlying subpoena was the product of subjective bad faith. So sanctions can’t be awarded under 28 U.S.C. § 1927. See B.K.B. v. Maui Police Department, 276 F.3d 1091, 1107 (9th Cir. 2002), abrogated on other grounds by Fort Bend County, Texas v. Davis, 587 U.S. 541 (2019). As for Rule 45(d)(1), the bankruptcy judge did find that the discovery sought by the subpoena would have served an improper purpose. But it isn’t apparent that the subpoena was initially issued for an improper purpose. Plus, “courts have interpreted Rule 45(d)(1) sanctions as applying primarily to reimburse a non-party’s costs incurred in complying with a subpoena, not merely litigating a motion to quash.” Fujikura Ltd. v. Finisar Corp., 2015 WL 5782351, at *8 (N.D. Cal. Oct. 5, 2015). With regard to F.R.A.P. 38 and 28 U.S.C. § 1912,…