Searching over 5,500,000 cases.


searching
Buy This Entire Record For $7.95

Download the entire decision to receive the complete text, official citation,
docket number, dissents and concurrences, and footnotes for this case.

Learn more about what you receive with purchase of this case.

Lipman v. Antoon

United States District Court, District of Columbia

January 3, 2018

ANDREW D. LIPMAN, Petitioner,
v.
PATRICK ANTOON, JR., Respondent.

          MEMORANDUM OPINION

          Emmet G. Sullivan United States District Judge.

         I. Introduction

         Pending before the Court are (1) petitioner Andrew Lipman's motion to quash a subpoena served on him by Patrick Antoon, Jr., plaintiff in an underlying action before the United States District Court for the Western District of Arkansas (“Western District of Arkansas”), Mot. Quash, ECF No. 1; and (2)Mr. Antoon's motion to transfer Mr. Lipman's motion to quash to the Western District of Arkansas, Mot. Transfer, ECF No. 2. Upon consideration of the motion to quash and the motion to transfer, the responses and replies, the applicable law, and the entire record, Mr. Antoon's motion to transfer shall be GRANTED, and this miscellaneous proceeding, including the pending motion to quash, shall be TRANSFERRED to the Western District of Arkansas.

         II. Background

         Mr. Antoon has been imprisoned in an Arkansas Department of Corrections facility since March 2014. Opp'n Transfer 3, ECF No. 5. He sued defendant Securus Technologies, Inc. (“Securus”), a company that provides Inmate Calling Services (“ICS”) to “more than 3, 400 public safety, law enforcement, and corrections agencies and over 1.2 million inmates, ” on behalf of similarly situated persons who were “charged exorbitant rates and fees” to use its ICS intrastate services. Id.

         Mr. Antoon filed his complaint on January 9, 2017 in the Western District of Arkansas. The case was assigned to District Court Judge Timothy Brooks. See Antoon v. Securus Techs., Inc., Civ. No. 5:17-cv-5008 (W.D. Ark.). Following the resolution of Securus' motion to dismiss, Mr. Antoon's surviving claims against Securus are for unjust enrichment and for a violation of the Arkansas Deceptive Trade Practices Act. Moffa Decl. ¶ 5, ECF No. 2-1. Discovery has been on-going since April 2017 and is scheduled to end in March 2018. See Case Management Order 2, ECF No. 53 (5:17-cv-5008). Currently pending before Judge Brooks are Securus' motion for summary judgment, ECF No. 52 (5:17-cv-5008), and its motion for a protective order regarding Mr. Lipman's nonparty subpoena, ECF No. 65 (5:17-cv-5008).

         Mr. Antoon's case is the fourth of four related ICS cases before Judge Brooks.[1] Mojica v. Securus Techs. Inc. is one of these related cases against Securus for its interstate ICS practices. Civ. No. 14-5258 (W.D. Ark.) In both the interstate and intrastate cases against Securus, the parties are represented by the same counsel. See Mot. To Quash 13, ECF No. 1. The interstate ICS cases are scheduled for trial pending the en banc review of Global Tel*Link v. FCC, 859 F.3d 39 (D.C. Cir. 2017), which concerns the legality of the Federal Communications Commission's (“FCC”) interstate ICS regulations. Id.

         Mr. Lipman, the nonparty subpoena recipient, is a partner at Morgan, Lewis & Bockius, the law firm representing Securus in the underlying matter. Mot. Quash 3, ECF No. 1. He is also the Chairman of the firm's Advisory Board, a “leadership” position. Id. Mr. Lipman specializes in telecommunications work and was involved in providing comments to the FCC regarding its ICS rulemaking proceedings. Opp'n Quash 5, ECF No. 3. Mr. Lipman submitted the comments on behalf of himself and “clients with an interest in the provision of Inmate Calling Services.” Id. (citing FCC Docket WC 12-375).

         On July 20, 2017, Mr. Antoon served Mr. Lipman with a subpoena. Opp'n Transfer 4, ECF No. 5. The subpoena requests documents and testimony in connection with the statements Mr. Lipman made to the FCC in WC Docket No. 12-375: Rates for Interstate Inmate Calling Services. The subpoena seeks six categories of documents:

[1] [R]etainer agreement(s) and any documents confirming [Mr. Lipman's] retention by any ICS provider(s) for services rendered . . . in connection with WC Docket No. 12-375: Rates for Interstate Inmate Calling Services;
[2] Documents sufficient to identify the certain clients with an interest in the provision of inmate calling services (ICS) on whose behalf [Mr. Lipman] submitted [his February 20, 2015] letter to . . . [the FCC];
[3] Documents sufficient to identify the certain clients with an interest in the provision of inmate calling services (ICS) on whose behalf [Mr. Lipman] submitted [his October 15, 2015] letter to . . . [the FCC];
[4] Invoices, billing records, or other documents reflecting any invoices [Mr. Lipman] sent to Defendant for services rendered in connection with the following filings submitted by [Mr. Lipman] to the [FCC] in WC Docket No. 12-375: Rates for Interstate Inmate Calling Services: [February 20, 2015 Letter; September 28, 2015 Letter; October 15, 2015 Letter];
[5] Documents supporting the positions advanced in [Mr. Lipman's February 20, 2015 ...

Buy This Entire Record For $7.95

Download the entire decision to receive the complete text, official citation,
docket number, dissents and concurrences, and footnotes for this case.

Learn more about what you receive with purchase of this case.