OSU

📧 "Supplemental request in lieu of federal subpoena" to OSU

Logan M Isaac

— 3 min read
Share
📧 "Supplemental request in lieu of federal subpoena" to OSU

I write on four matters: (1) discrepancies in OSU's record on Exclusion Order 2025-082137; (2) a preservation demand; (3) supplemental document requests related to the Rule 45 subpoena to OSU Department of Public Safety in Isaac v. Boshart Davis, No. 6:25-cv-01159-MC (D. Or.), now out for service through the U.S. Marshals Service; and (4) my pending resolution proposal.

1. DISCREPANCIES

a. Undisclosed prior review. On April 4, 2025, Interim Chief Yon emailed OSP Lt. Casi Hegney: "I am a part of the OSU Threat Assessment Team. We were reviewing a case involving Isaac." ISAAC-OSP-SDT-000039.That is 32 days before the May 6, 2025 visit OSU cites as the basis for the exclusion.Chief Yon's denial letter, dated May 28, 2025, states: "I heard about this situation on May 7" and "I do not know the entire series of events that has transpired." Nothing OSU sent me disclosed the Threat Assessment Team's review or the contact with OSP. I learned of both on September 25, 2026, through federal discovery.

b. Initiator and appeal officer are the same person. The letter states: "I heard about this situation on May 7 and had Officer Beeton contact William." Chief Yon then decided the appeal of the exclusion he initiated.

c. Appeal deadline. University Standard 07-300 § 5.2.4 requires a decision within a "timely manner." My appeal was delivered May 15, 2025. On May 20, Chief Yon wrote: "I will have a response to in the next couple of days." On June 3: "It is in the mail." The letter is dated May 28; certified mail records show it was sent June 6, 2026. I first learned the outcome on June 10 ("I denied the appeal"), 26 days after receipt.

d. Stated basis. The letter states: "This entire situation revolves around your desire to speak with the Veterans at the Holcomb Center." It identifies no threat and no safety finding. The exclusion covered the entire campus. 

e. Expiration. The letter states the exclusion "will remain in effect until January 22, 2026, when it expires." On April 1, 2026, OSU DPS officers detained me near the Holcomb Center (OSU PD Case No. 202600281). Officer Beeton showed me a DPS screen listing the order as active.

Please state OSU's position on the following:

  • (i) the date the Threat Assessment Team opened its case concerning me, and who referred it;
  • (ii) whether OSP responded to Chief Yon's April 4, 2025 inquiry, and in what form;
  • (iii) the status of Exclusion Order 2025-082137 in DPS systems between January 22 and April 1, 2026, and who was responsible for updating it.

2. PRESERVATION

My April 2, 2026 preservation demand is extended to every category in Section 3, including Threat Assessment Team records, email and messaging accounts of the individuals named there, phone logs, and system audit trails. Litigation is reasonably anticipated. See my ORS 30.275 notice of July 3, 2026.

3. SUPPLEMENTAL REQUESTS

An email does not amend a subpoena. I ask OSU to produce the following with its subpoena response. For any item OSU declines to produce on that basis, I will serve a supplemental subpoena after notice under Fed. R. Civ. P. 45(a)(4), and I ask that items 4 through 7 be treated in the alternative as a request under ORS 192.311 et seq. Time period: October 1, 2024 to present, unless stated.

  1. All communications between any OSU employee and the Oregon State Police, Oregon Legislative Administration, any legislator or legislative staff, or the Oregon Department of Justice concerning me, including any response to Chief Yon's April 4, 2025 email and any notes or logs of related calls.
  2. The Threat Assessment Team's complete file concerning me: referral, date opened, members participating, notes, minutes, assessments, and disposition.
  3. All communications concerning me, March 1 through June 30, 2025, among James Yon, Chad Beeton, Michael Harmon, William Elfering, Nikki Gold, Kevin Dougherty, Stephen Jenkins, William Hankel, and the supervisors to whom Mr. Hankel forwarded my March 21, 2025 email.
  4. The complete files for DPS Case 2025-00494 and Exclusion Order 2025-082137, including Officer Beeton's notes of his May 7, 2025 contact with Mr. Elfering and any witness statements.
  5. The appeal file: all drafts of the letter dated May 28, 2025, with metadata, and the certified mail records for it.
  6. All system records and audit trails reflecting the status of Exclusion Order 2025-082137 from issuance through April 1, 2026, including any expiration entry.
  7. The Threat Assessment Team's charter and procedures, and the versions of University Standards 07-300 in effect in May 2025.

4. RESOLUTION

My resolution proposal of October 1, 2026, to Ms. Gose remains unanswered. I remain willing to resolve this matter without further litigation. Please respond by October 20, 2026.

Consistent with my practice, this correspondence and OSU's responses are published publicly online at gijustice.com. 

Read more