UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS January 28, 2025

Christopher M. Wolpert FOR THE TENTH CIRCUIT Clerk of Court _________________________________

THOMAS WORKMAN,

Petitioner - Appellant,

v. No. 24-2033

UNITED STATES POSTAL SERVICE; JASMINE MARTINEZ; RUFINA SANCHEZ, a/k/a Perla Sanchez; YVONNE THOMPSON,

Respondents - Appellees. _________________________________

Appeal from the United States District Court for the District of New Mexico (D.C. No. 1:23-MC-00030-MIS-GBW) _________________________________ W. Jeff Barnes, W.J. Barnes, P.A., Boca Raton, Florida, for Petitioner-Appellant. Emil J. Kiehne, Assistant United States Attorney, Office of the United States Attorney (Alexander M.M. Uballez, United States Attorney, with him on the brief), Albuquerque, New Mexico, for Respondents-Appellees United States Postal Service, Jasmine Martinez, Rufina Sanchez, and Yvonne Thompson. _________________________________ Before HARTZ, PHILLIPS, and EID, Circuit Judges. _________________________________ HARTZ, Circuit Judge. _________________________________

A fire destroyed the Chimayo post office in northern New Mexico. The building had been leased by petitioner Thomas Workman to the United States Postal Appellate Case: 24-2033 Document: 66-1 Date Filed: 01/28/2025 Page: 2

Service (USPS). Mr. Workman filed a petition under Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 27 in the United States District Court for the District of New Mexico to take five depositions before deciding whether to sue USPS. The court denied the petition because Mr. Workman failed to provide a proper reason why he could not already bring a lawsuit or to explain why the requested testimony would be lost if not taken immediately. Exercising jurisdiction under 28 U.S.C. § 1291, we agree with the district court and affirm.

I. BACKGROUND

The post office fire occurred on February 14, 2023. That September Mr. Workman filed a verified petition under Rule 27(a) to take pre-suit depositions of three USPS employees (Jasmine Martinez, Rufina “Perla” Sanchez, and Yvonne Thompson, hereinafter the Appellees); one USPS contractor; and the Fire Marshal of Santa Fe County.1 The petition stated that Mr. Workman wanted to bring contract and tort claims against USPS but could not “presently” bring these claims because of his “incomplete” and “ongoing investigation into the cause and origination of the fire; those who may be responsible parties for the fire and consequent damage; and the manner in which USPS operated the facility.” Aplt. App., Vol. 1 at 12–13. Apparently to support the assertion that a court order for the depositions was necessary, the petition also stated that counsel for USPS refused to allow counsel for Mr. Workman to take sworn statements from the USPS employees and that Greg

1 The depositions of the contractor and fire marshal are no longer at issue and these individuals are not parties to this appeal. Page 2 Appellate Case: 24-2033 Document: 66-1 Date Filed: 01/28/2025 Page: 3

Shelton, a USPS official, demanded that Mr. Workman destroy a letter suggesting that USPS knew the facility had asbestos in its walls.

Three months later Mr. Workman filed an amended verified petition, which offered three additional assertions to support the need for pre-suit depositions: (1) USPS had transferred Ms. Martinez and Ms. Sanchez to another post office in New Mexico; (2) Ms. Martinez and Ms. Sanchez might forget their