Affinity Credit Union v. Apple Inc.
- Jeffrey White
- 4:22-cv-04174
- U.S. District Court · Northern District of California
- 1
In Affinity Credit Union v. Apple, Judge White ordered briefing on whether plaintiffs may challenge subpoenas issued to third parties.
Affinity Credit Union and the other plaintiffs, and Apple Inc.; each side must submit briefing on the plaintiffs’ standing to challenge the subpoenas.
What happened
Affinity Credit Union and other plaintiffs challenged subpoenas described as “Large Issuer” subpoenas in their dispute with Apple Inc. The opinion does not decide whether they have standing to object.
The parties’ joint letter brief did not meaningfully address that issue. The court noted that parties generally lack standing to challenge subpoenas issued to third parties.
Judge Jeffrey S. White ordered each side to file a brief of no more than seven pages by August 23, 2024, addressing whether the plaintiffs have standing. The court said it would not consider response or reply briefs without permission.
The detailed version
- Affinity Credit Union v. Apple Inc. · No. 4:22-cv-04174
- Jeffrey White
- Aug. 16, 2024
Background
The plaintiffs challenged subpoenas referred to in the opinion as the “Large Issuer” subpoenas and as subpoenas issued to absent class members. The parties submitted a joint letter brief concerning the dispute.
Issue
The court found that the parties had not meaningfully addressed whether the plaintiffs have standing—the legal requirement that a party be entitled to bring a particular challenge—to object to the subpoenas. The court noted that parties generally lack standing to challenge subpoenas issued to third parties, citing Kowalski v. Tesmer, 543 U.S. 125, 130 (2004).
Order
The court ordered additional briefing limited to the plaintiffs’ standing to challenge the subpoenas. Each side may file a brief of up to seven pages by August 23, 2024. The court stated that it would not consider response or reply briefs without leave of court. The opinion did not decide whether the plaintiffs have standing.
Read the full 1-page opinion on CourtListener, the free public archive maintained by the Free Law Project.