United States v. Creation & Innovation

3 OCAHO 491 UNITED STATES DEPARTMENT OF JUSTICE EXECUTIVE OFFICE FOR IMMIGRATION REVIEW OFFICE OF THE CHIEF ADMINISTRATIVE HEARING OFFICER IN RE CHARGE OF ROSA GAYTAN UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, Complainant, v. CREATION & INNOVATION, INC., Respondent. 8 U.S.C. §1324b Proceeding ) CASE NO. 92B00242 ORDER DIRECTING RESUBMISSION OF REQUEST FOR SUBPOENA On March 2, 1993, the Office of Special Counsel(OSC), for the United States of America, Complainant, filed two Applications For Subpoena pursuant to 28 C.F.R. 68.25. Neither application contained any infor-mation regarding the relevance or the scope of the documents it wished to subpoena. I have previously held that, since granting the issuance of a requested subpoena is discretionary, I would make an appropriate decision after reviewing the requesting party's showing of general relevance and reasonable scope of the evidence sought.

U.S. v. Beef America Operating Company, OCAHO Case No. 92B00039 5/28/92). Even though I have no reason to believe that OSC is requesting unnecessary subpoenas, it is my belief that it is in the interests of justice and fairness to protect third parties from unnecessary involvement in cases before me. Therefore, I direct OSC to refile their requests for subpoenas with the requested showing so that I may properly review their requests. 941941 3 OCAHO 491 IT IS SO ORDERED this 3rd day of March, 1993, at San Diego, California.

E. MILTON FROSBURG Administrative Law Judge 942942