Case 3:16-cv WHA Document 29-1 Filed 08/25/16 Page 1 of 5

Similar documents
Case 3:16-cv WHA Document 29 Filed 08/25/16 Page 1 of 12

Case 3:15-cv WHA Document 150 Filed 02/15/17 Page 1 of 7

Case 3:15-cv WHA Document 31 Filed 03/03/16 Page 1 of 14 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA.

Case 1:13-cv WYD-MEH Document 29 Filed 02/26/14 USDC Colorado Page 1 of 13 IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE DISTRICT OF COLORADO

Case 2:16-cv RSM Document 60 Filed 01/26/17 Page 1 of 8 Honorable Ricardo S. Martinez

Case 8:13-cv JSM-TBM Document 42 Filed 02/05/15 Page 1 of 7 PageID 868 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT MIDDLE DISTRICT OF FLORIDA TAMPA DIVISION

Case 1:17-cv WYD-MEH Document 9 Filed 09/22/17 USDC Colorado Page 1 of 9 THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE DISTRICT OF COLORADO

2:13-cv VAR-RSW Doc # 32 Filed 11/20/14 Pg 1 of 8 Pg ID 586 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF MICHIGAN

Case 1:13-cv RJJ ECF No. 164 filed 06/22/16 PageID.1979 Page 1 of 10

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT EASTERN DISTRICT OF WASHINGTON

Case 3:15-cv BTM-BLM Document 6 Filed 02/16/16 Page 1 of 7

Case 3:10-cv JPB -JES Document 66 Filed 12/16/10 Page 1 of 5 PageID #: 1001

Case 8:13-cv JSM-TBM Document 53 Filed 02/19/15 Page 1 of 9 PageID 1057 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT MIDDLE DISTRICT OF FLORIDA TAMPA DIVISION

USDC IN/ND case 2:18-cv JVB-JEM document 1 filed 04/26/18 page 1 of 8 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT NORTHERN DISTRICT OF INDIANA HAMMOND DIVISION

Case 8:14-cv JDW-EAJ Document 10 Filed 01/12/15 Page 1 of 5 PageID 81 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT MIDDLE DISTRICT OF FLORIDA TAMPA DIVISION

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT MIDDLE DISTRICT OF FLORIDA TAMPA DIVISION. v. Case No. 8:19-cv-582-T-36AEP ORDER

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA. Plaintiff,

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA. Plaintiff, Defendant.

Case 2:16-cv APG-GWF Document 3 Filed 04/24/16 Page 1 of 7

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA - SAN FRANCISCO

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT DISTRICT OF OREGON

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA. Plaintiff, ORDER DENYING MOTION FOR v.

Case 1:11-cv JDB-JMF Document 8 Filed 01/23/12 Page 1 of 6 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT EASTERN DISTRICT OF MICHIGAN SOUTHERN DIVISION. Case No. 14-cv Hon. George Caram Steeh

Case 1:14-cv WYD-MEH Document 26 Filed 07/17/14 USDC Colorado Page 1 of 6 IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE DISTRICT OF COLORADO

Case 1:10-cv BAH Document 89 Filed 03/11/11 Page 1 of 5 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA

Case 3:15-cv WHA Document 8 Filed 03/28/16 Page 1 of 20

Case 1:10-cv RMU Document 19 Filed 01/13/11 Page 1 of 5 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA

JOINT STIPULATION OF DISMISSAL OF DEFENDANT AIR FRANCE-KLM WITHOUT PREJUDICE [F.R.C.P. 4141(a)(1)(A)(ii)]

Case 3:17-cv LB Document 77-3 Filed 03/09/18 Page 1 of 18

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT EASTERN DISTRICT OF PENNSYLVANIA

Case 2:17-cv DB-DBP Document 65 Filed 07/20/18 Page 1 of 10 IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE DISTRICT OF UTAH

Case 2:12-cv ODW-JC Document 23 Filed 12/18/12 Page 1 of 8 Page ID #:216

Case 3:10-cv N Document 2-2 Filed 09/30/10 Page 1 of 6 PageID 29

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA CIV. NO. S KJM CKD

Case 1:13-cv WYD-MEH Document 28 Filed 02/20/14 USDC Colorado Page 1 of 8 IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE DISTRICT OF COLORADO

2:13-cv PDB-MKM Doc # 33 Filed 10/06/14 Pg 1 of 9 Pg ID 305 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF MICHIGAN

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

Case 3:17-cv VC Document Filed 09/06/18 Page 1 of 6

Case 2:14-cv JLL-JAD Document 16 Filed 05/11/15 Page 1 of 7 PageID: 151

Case 3:11-cv BEN-MDD Document 20 Filed 02/17/12 Page 1 of 8

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE NORTHERN DISTRICT OF GEORGIA ATLANTA DIVISION

Case 1:12-cv JMF Document 6 Filed 06/06/12 Page 1 of 10. : : Plaintiff, : : Defendants.

Case3:13-cv SI Document28 Filed09/25/13 Page1 of 5

Case 1:12-cv HB Document 7 Filed 06/12/12 Page 1 of 6

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT EASTERN DISTRICT OF WASHINGTON

Case 3:15-cv WHA Document 22 Filed 02/29/16 Page 1 of 10 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

Case 1:03-cv NG Document 492 Filed 12/19/2007 Page 1 of 5

Case 2:14-cv SJO-FFM Document 27 Filed 10/14/14 Page 1 of 7 Page ID #:773

EEOC v. Pacific Airport Services, Inc.,

Case 5:11-cv OLG-JES-XR Document Filed 09/25/13 Page 1 of 5 IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE WESTERN DISTRICT OF TEXAS

Case 2:18-cv R-AGR Document 7 Filed 02/05/18 Page 1 of 2 Page ID #:26

Case: 1:13-cv Document #: 48 Filed: 03/14/14 Page 1 of 12 PageID #:493 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE NORTHERN DISTRICT OF ILLINOIS

CASE 0:12-cv JNE-FLN Document 9 Filed 08/03/12 Page 1 of 6 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT DISTRICT OF MINNESOTA

Case 2:17-cv TSZ Document 46 Filed 05/25/18 Page 1 of 12 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT WESTERN DISTRICT OF WASHINGTON AT SEATTLE

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT DISTRICT OF MINNESOTA Criminal No. 16-CR-334(2) (JNE/KMM)

2:12-cv DPH-MJH Doc # 63 Filed 05/30/13 Pg 1 of 6 Pg ID 1692 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT EASTERN DISTRICT OF MICHIGAN SOUTHERN DIVISION

Case 3:13-cv PDB Document 87 Filed 01/26/16 Page 1 of 13 PageID 480

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA SAN FRANCISCO DIVISION

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE CENTRAL DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

Case3:09-cv RS Document78 Filed05/03/11 Page1 of 7

Case3:14-mc VC Document1 Filed11/04/14 Page1 of 8 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 9

Case 3:17-cv LB Document 87 Filed 03/28/18 Page 1 of 6

United States District Court

[Remainder of page intentionally left blank]

UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FIRST CIRCUIT

Case 1:12-cv GMS Document 60 Filed 12/27/13 Page 1 of 5 PageID #: 1904

Case5:08-cv PSG Document519 Filed08/22/13 Page1 of 9 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA SAN JOSE DIVISION

Case3:12-cv CRB Document52 Filed04/05/13 Page1 of 6 IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

Case5:10-cv JW Document72 Filed03/11/11 Page1 of 5

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE DISTRICT OF COLORADO UNOPPOSED MOTION TO WITHDRAW AS COUNSEL

UNITED STATES BANKRUPTCY COURT EASTERN DISTRICT OF MICHIGAN SOUTHERN DIVISION. Chapter 9 Hon. Steven W. Rhodes

SUPERIOR COURT OF THE STATE OF CALIFORNIA

Case 3:09-cv CRB Document 152 Filed 10/07/16 Page 1 of 5

Case No IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE ELEVENTH CIRCUIT MALIBU MEDIA, LLC, Plaintiff-Appellee, LEO PELIZZO

Case 2:12-cv GMS Document 21 Filed 11/28/12 Page 1 of 6 IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE DISTRICT OF ARIZONA ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) )

TERMS OF SERVICE Effective Date: March 30 th, 2017

Case 3:17-cv VC Document Filed 03/28/18 Page 1 of 5

Case 2:13-cv LFR Document 24 Filed 07/15/14 Page 1 of 5

FILED: NEW YORK COUNTY CLERK 03/19/ :45 PM INDEX NO /2016 NYSCEF DOC. NO. 168 RECEIVED NYSCEF: 03/19/2018

EXHIBIT J To THE DECLARATION OF HOLLY GAUDREAU IN SUPPORT OF MOTION FOR EXPEDITED

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF OHIO WESTERN DIVISION

Case 1:13-cv WYD-MEH Document 41 Filed 08/13/14 USDC Colorado Page 1 of 5 IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE DISTRICT OF COLORADO

Case 1:16-cv AJN Document 176 Filed 06/26/17 Page 1 of 6 IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF NEW YORK

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF NORTH CAROLINA Civil Action No. 5:08-CV D

Case 3:15-cr BAS Document 166 Filed 03/02/17 PageID.752 Page 1 of 8

Case 1:18-cv Document 1 Filed 01/20/18 Page 1 of 8

NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA SAN FRANCISCO DIVISION

Case: , 07/03/2017, ID: , DktEntry: 12-1, Page 1 of 3 NOT FOR PUBLICATION UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE NINTH CIRCUIT

ARIZONA SUPERIOR COURT IN AND FOR THE COUNTY OF PIMA

Case: 1:12-cv Document #: 626 Filed: 04/25/18 Page 1 of 7 PageID #:23049

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE DISTRICT OF ARIZONA

Case ID: Control No.:

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

TONY DEROSA-GRUND, SILVERBIRD MEDIA GROUP, LLC, EVERGREEN MEDIA GROUP, LLC, EVERGREEN MEDIA HOLDINGS, LLC,

Case 2:14-cv JRG-RSP Document 9 Filed 08/08/14 Page 1 of 5 PageID #: 227

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT CENTRAL DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA WESTERN DIVISION

Case 4:12-cv JMM Document 1 Filed 02/27/12 Page 1 of 13

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT CENTRAL DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA DECLARATION OF PLAINTIFF KURT CASADINE IN SUPPORT 17. Defendants.

Transcription:

Case :-cv-000-wha Document - Filed 0// Page of Brian Heit (SBN: 0) HEIT LAW GROUP, PC Townsgate Road, Suite 0 Westlake Village, CA [phone]: (). Brian.Heit@HElaw.attorney Attorney for Plaintiff UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA SAN FRANCISCO 0 MALIBU MEDIA, LLC, vs. Plaintiff, JOHN DOES JOHN DOE subscriber assigned IP address.0..0, Defendant. Case Number: :-cv-000-wha 0 DECLARATION OF BRIAN M. HEIT I, BRIAN M. HEIT, DO HEREBY DECLARE:. I am over the age of eighteen () and otherwise competent to make this declaration. The facts stated in this declaration are based upon my personal knowledge.. I am an attorney licensed in the State of California and I currently represent Malibu Media, LLC ( Malibu ) in the Northern, Southern, and Eastern Districts of California.. I am submitting this declaration in response to Defendant s Motion for Attorney s Fees and Sanctions [CM/ECF and ].. Upon learning Defendant s identity, Malibu immediately began an investigation to determine whether Defendant is the infringer.. Through its investigation, Malibu learned that Defendant lived in a condo with three female roommates.

Case :-cv-000-wha Document - Filed 0// Page of 0 0. Malibu also learned that Defendant resided at the condo during the entire period of infringement.. Malibu s investigator Excipio recorded not only the torrenting activity of Malibu s works taking place through Defendant s IP address but that Defendant s IP address was torrenting numerous other copyrighted files.. During its investigation, Malibu compared this torrenting activity to Defendant s public social media accounts to determine whether Defendant s hobbies and interests correlated to the torrenting activity taking place through Defendant s IP address.. Malibu found that it did. 0. Defendant s Facebook listed music and TV shows that he liked.. Specifically, Defendant liked the following musicians: Kanye West, Beastie Boys, NWA, and Miles Davis. He also liked the TV shows South Park and It s Always Sunny in Philadelphia.. Plaintiff s evidence of torrenting activity showed that Defendant s IP address downloaded the following copyrighted music files: April, 0 - Kanye West Yeezus (RapGodFathers.info) January, 0 - Straight.Outta.Compton.0.DVDSCR.x-LEGi0N.mkv January, 0 - Beastie Boys The In Sound From Way Out [Instrumentals] April 0, 0 - Miles Davis - Bitches Brew jazz mp0[rogercc]. Plaintiff s evidence of torrenting activity also showed that Defendant s IP address downloaded the following copyrighted TV Shows: 0//0 South Park SE0 0p HDTV x KILLERS rartv tv //0 Its Always Sunny in Philadelphia Season,,,,, & + Extras DVDRip TSV 0//0 South.Park.SE0.0p.HDTV.x-KILLERS[EtHD] 0//0 South.Park.SE0.0p.HDTV.x-KILLERS[rarbg] 0//0 South.Park.SE0.HDTV.x-KILLERS[ettv] 0//0 South Park Bigger Longer and Uncut () [00p] 0//0 South.Park.SE0.0p.HDTV.x-KILLERS[EtHD] 0//0 South.Park.SE0.HDTV.XviD-FUM[ettv] 0//0 South.Park.SE0.HDTV.x-KILLERS[ettv] 0//0 South.Park.SE0.0p.HDTV.x-KILLERS[rarbg] 0//0 South.Park.SE0.0p.HDTV.x-KILLERS[EtHD] 0//0 South.Park.SE0.0p.HDTV.x-KILLERS[EtHD] 0//0 South.Park.SE0.HDTV.x-KILLERS[rarbg]

Case :-cv-000-wha Document - Filed 0// Page of 0 0 0//0 South.Park.SE0.HDTV.x-KILLERS.[VTV].mp 0//0 Its.Always.Sunny.in.Philadelphia.SE0.HDTV.x-KILLERS[ettv] 0//0 Its.Always.Sunny.in.Philadelphia.SE0.HDTV.x-KILLERS[ettv] 0//0 Its.Always.Sunny.in.Philadelphia.SE0.HDTV.x-KILLERS[ettv]. Plaintiff served its subpoena on Defendant s ISP on March, 0.. This Court ordered that within days of the date of service of the subpoena, Comcast must serve a copy of the Court s order on Defendant.. Amazingly, on April, 0 approximately three days after Defendant would have likely received notice of the infringement the infringement through Defendant s IP address stopped.. Given that notice of infringement was sent to Defendant, and the infringement finally stopped in Defendant s household after more than a year of constant downloads, my client had a reasonable basis to believe Defendant had direct control over the infringement.. On May, 0, I spoke with counsel for Defendant who informed me that a forensic investigation of Defendant s computer had been undertaken and requested that I dismiss Defendant immediately.. I requested that Defendant s counsel send the report to me for review. 0. Defendant s counsel told me that he would not send the report until I agreed to dismiss the case. This made absolutely no sense to me, but I could not get Defendant s counsel to change his mind. I found his unwillingness to provide me with the report and his demand that I dismiss the case without viewing it first suspicious. In my mind, it reasonably called into question the report s accuracy. Moreover, my expert was never given independent access to investigate Defendant s hard drive.. Defendant s counsel did not provide me with the expert report until it was accompanied by his Rule Motion. And, Defendant s counsel never gave me a reason for not sending the report.. In his declaration, Defendant s counsel states I did not ask Setec to prepare a written report on its investigation until it became necessary to file the Rule Motion, in order to save money. See CM/ECF at. He never conveyed this information to me.

Case :-cv-000-wha Document - Filed 0// Page of 0 0. Importantly, I repeatedly told him that my client needed to review some sort of verification that an investigation took place to dismiss the lawsuit.. Indeed, if every defendant could escape liability by simply stating an investigation took place, without any sort of verification, no one would ever be held liable.. On June, 0, my client concluded its investigation and decided to proceed against Defendant. My former partner, Brenna Erlbaum, filed the Amended Complaint.. On June, 0 I notified Defendant s counsel of my client s position and he still refused to produce the forensic report and further insisted I take his word on its veracity.. I did not realize my partner had already filed the Amended Complaint and mistakenly told Defendant s counsel we would be filing it the next day. Importantly, because a decision had been made to proceed, I did not want to cause unnecessary delay.. Having not received any exculpatory evidence from Defendant or his counsel, and ample evidence of Defendant s guilt, my client had every right to proceed.. Moreover, my client and I agreed that our expert should have the opportunity to conduct the same examination as Defendant s expert, and that to best serve this process, we should enter into litigation and conduct formal discovery. 0. On June, 0, I sent Defendant s counsel an email with the Amended Complaint and a waiver of service.. Defendant s counsel delayed returning the Waiver of Service, requiring my client to expend additional time and energy serving Defendant.. After my client effectuated service of process, Defendant s counsel returned the Waiver of Service and demanded 0 days to respond to the Amended Complaint.. My client agreed in an attempt to resolve conflict and avoid unnecessary litigation.. On June, 0, I notified Defendant s Counsel of the Case Management Conference with the Court.. On July, 0, my partner, Brenna Erlbaum sent an email requesting Defendant s counsel accept electronic service. Again, Defendant s counsel failed to respond.. On July, 0 Defendant served Plaintiff with a Rule motion.

Case :-cv-000-wha Document - Filed 0// Page of 0. With the motion, was Defendant s forensic report detailing the examination of his hard drive. Reviewing Defendant s motion and the report, Plaintiff and its counsel concluded it still had a good faith basis to proceed against Defendant. Indeed, as in any litigation, Plaintiff should have the opportunity to conduct its own examination and rebut Defendant s report. While Defendant had some evidence of innocence, Plaintiff felt its evidence against Defendant was strong. Regardless, Plaintiff, out of an abundance of caution, decided to dismiss its Amended Complaint against Defendant. Because Defendant had not answered, Plaintiff had an absolute right to do so. DECLARATION PURSUANT TO U.S.C., I hereby declare under penalty of perjury that the foregoing is true and correct. Executed on this th day of August, 0. 0 By: BRIAN M. HEIT, ESQ.