In Raja v. LVNV Funding, LLC, 2026 WL 701557 (E.D. Va. Mar. 12, 2026), the Eastern District of Virginia addressed the scope of third-party subpoenas in a consumer debt dispute where the plaintiff alleged identity theft under the FDCPA. The defendant issued subpoenas to the DMV, Costco, and Navy Federal Credit Union to obtain records aimed at verifying whether the plaintiff himself opened and used the disputed credit account. The plaintiff moved to quash, arguing the requests were overly broad, disproportionate, and sought sensitive personal information.

The court largely rejected these objections, emphasizing that discovery directed at non-parties must still satisfy relevance and proportionality under Rules 26 and 45, but may proceed where it targets information central to the claims or defenses. Rule 26(b)(1) ensures that the discovery is proportional to the needs of the case while being relevant to the claim and/or defense. Rule 45(d) requires the issuing party to make reasonable steps to not place an undue expense or burden on the subpoena receiver.

Here, because the plaintiff placed his identity directly at issue, the requested records, ranging from government identification to payment history, were deemed probative of whether identity theft occurred. The court declined to shield this information simply because it was sensitive, noting a party cannot rely on personal facts while simultaneously withholding them from discovery.

At the same time, the court reinforced meaningful limits on third-party discovery. It narrowed the Costco subpoena to avoid sweeping in unrelated individuals with similar names, requiring production only where specific identifying information matched known data points. This tailored modification reflects a key proportionality principle: even relevant discovery must be carefully calibrated to avoid unnecessary intrusion into non-party privacy.

The decision highlights the balance courts continue to strike in modern discovery, permitting targeted access to sensitive information when it is central to the dispute, while imposing guardrails to prevent overbroad requests. For practitioners, it underscores the importance of narrowly tailoring subpoenas with clear identifiers and anticipating heightened scrutiny when seeking non-party data.

If your organization is seeking support with eDiscovery, our team has solutions to address all phases of the discovery process. At CODISCOVR, we deliver client-focused, defensible, and scalable solutions using advanced technology and intelligent review practices to meet eDiscovery, document review, and information governance needs in a manner that reduces the risks and costs associated with electronically stored information (ESI). Reach out to Shari Coltoff at CODISCOVR for more information. Shari has over 20 years of experience in the ever-evolving eDiscovery life cycle, from document collection to managing large long-term reviews through productions.