Court, Explained
U.S. Federal District Courts
Back to docket
N.D. Cal.Procedural orderFiled Oct. 8, 2019

Hilton v. Pagani Worldwide LLC

Judge
Vince Chhabria
Docket
3:19-cv-01848
Court
U.S. District Court · Northern District of California
Pages
2
DiscoveryCivil Procedure
In one sentence

In Hilton v. Pagani Worldwide LLC, Judge Chhabria denied Hilton’s motion asking marshals to serve subpoenas for him.

Who this affects

The ruling affected James Sheldon Hilton’s request to have the United States Marshals Service serve subpoenas on third parties.

What happened

In Hilton v. Pagani Worldwide LLC, James Sheldon Hilton asked the court to order the United States Marshals Service to serve subpoenas on third parties. He relied on his permission to proceed without paying filing fees and on a federal service rule.

The court explained that this status does not make the court responsible for litigation expenses, including subpoena-service costs. The service rule applies to serving a summons and complaint, not to paying for or ordering service of subpoenas.

Judge Vince Chhabria denied Hilton’s motion for service on October 8, 2019.

The detailed version

For law students, journalists, and other readers who want the full reasoning

Case
Hilton v. Pagani Worldwide LLC · No. 3:19-cv-01848
Judge
Vince Chhabria
Date
Oct. 8, 2019

Background

Plaintiff James Sheldon Hilton asked the court to order the United States Marshals Service to serve his subpoenas on third parties. He cited an earlier order allowing him to proceed without paying filing fees, 28 U.S.C. § 1915, and Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 4(c)(3).

Court’s reasoning

The court held that permission to proceed without paying filing fees does not require the court to finance litigation-related expenses, including the costs of serving subpoenas. The court also explained that Rule 4(c)(3) concerns service of the summons and complaint. It does not authorize the court to pay for or order service of subpoenas.

Disposition

Judge Vince Chhabria denied Hilton’s motion for service. The opinion does not state that the motion was denied with or without prejudice.

The authoritative version

Read the full 2-page opinion on CourtListener, the free public archive maintained by the Free Law Project.

Open opinion PDF →
Summary written with AI assistance. See how summaries are made. Spot something wrong? Tell us.