Party’s Motion to Quash Subpoena Denied for Lack of Standing

The entire opinion in Metro Light and Power LLC v. Furnlite, 2025 WL 1805793 (S.D.N.Y. Jul. 1, 2025), states:

Defendants oppose the non-party subpoenas on undue burden and relevance grounds. But a “party lacks standing to challenge subpoenas issued to non-parties on the grounds of relevancy or undue burden.” Universitas Educ., LLC v. Nova Grp., Inc., 2013 WL 57892, at *5 (S.D.N.Y. Jan. 4, 2013). So the motion to quash is DENIED. The Clerk of Court is respectfully directed to terminate the motions at ECF No. 71 and 72.

In the words of Yogi Berra:  “You can observe a lot by watching.”

Standing is often an issue in challenges to subpoenas.  “It Ends With Us” (Apr. 8, 2025)(“Ms. Lively challenged the Wayfarer Parties’ standing to assert privacy interests of non-parties….  ‘[T]he Wayfarer Parties have not demonstrated standing to object to the Subpoena requests seeking the phone records of non-parties…. Therefore, the Wayfarer Parties’ motion is denied as to the portions of the Subpoenas which seek the phone records of non-parties.’”).

The federal court in Maryland wrote that: “Under Rule 45, a party ordinarily ‘does not have standing to challenge a subpoena issued to a nonparty unless the party claims some personal right or privilege in the information sought by the subpoena.’”  Who Can Object to a Subpoena? (Oct. 28, 2024).  The Court recognized an exception where a party challenges a subpoena because it is in violation of the Court’s scheduling order.

In one recent case, a Court recharacterized a motion to quash a subpoena as a motion for protective order.  Changing the Forum for a Motion to Quash a Subpoena (Mar. 25, 2024).  If there are grounds to seek a protective order under Fed.R.Civ.P. 26(c), that could be a potential work-around.

For more information on subpoenas, please visit:

• “No Dog in the Fight” Analysis Applies to Scope of Subpoenas in the District of Maryland  (Apr. 4, 2025);
• No Need to Meet and Confer Before Motion to Quash Subpoena in District of AZ (Dec. 19, 2024);
• What “Expenses” Can a Non-Party Recover for Complying With a Discovery Subpoena? (Nov. 27, 2024);
• Who Can Object to a Subpoena? (Oct. 28, 2024);
• What Objections May Be Raised to a Subpoena by a Non-Party? (Oct. 15, 2024);
• Changing the Forum for a Motion to Quash a Subpoena (Mar. 25, 2024); and,
• Maryland Appellate Decision Permitting Limited Forensic Search of Non-Parties’ Cell Phones (Mar. 24, 2022).