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

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

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

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT WESTERN DISTRICT OF WASHINGTON AT SEATTLE

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

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

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

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

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

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

Case 1:13-cv LGS Document 20 Filed 06/26/13 Page 1 of 8. : Plaintiffs, : : : Defendants. :

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.

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA SAN FRANCISCO DIVISION

Case 2:11-cv GEB-EFB Document 10 Filed 01/31/12 Page 1 of 13 IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

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

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

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

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

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

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

Case 4:02-cv Document 661 Filed 11/01/2006 Page 1 of 6

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

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

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE DISTRICT OF DELAWARE

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

Case5:12-cv LHK Document501 Filed05/09/13 Page1 of 7 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA SAN JOSE DIVISION

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

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT CENTRAL DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

Case 2:16-cv JAD-VCF Document 29 Filed 06/28/17 Page 1 of 8 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT DISTRICT OF NEVADA *** ORDER

Case3:12-cv SI Document11 Filed07/13/12 Page1 of 6 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

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

Case 9:15-cv WJZ Document 8 Entered on FLSD Docket 01/26/2015 Page 1 of 12 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF FLORIDA

Case3:15-cv VC Document25 Filed06/19/15 Page1 of 8

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA (OAKLAND DIVISION)

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE WESTERN DISTRICT OF VIRGINIA Charlottesville Division

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA SAN JOSE DIVISION ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) )

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE NORTHERN DISTRICT OF ILLINOIS. TOYO TIRE U.S.A. CORP., ) ) Plaintiffs, ) ) v. ) Case No: 14 C 206 )

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA, SAN JOSE DIVISION ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) )

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA CASE NOS.

Case 1:07-cv CKK Document 26 Filed 04/28/2008 Page 1 of 17 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA

Case 3:04-cv JSW Document 122 Filed 08/26/2005 Page 1 of 7

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

Case4:12-cv JSW Document34 Filed09/19/14 Page1 of 11

Case3:07-cv SI Document102 Filed08/04/09 Page1 of 7 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

Case4:07-cv PJH Document833-1 Filed09/09/10 Page1 of 5

Case3:11-cv JCS Document10 Filed05/05/11 Page1 of 32 IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

Case 2:11-cv FMO-SS Document 256 Filed 03/17/17 Page 1 of 16 Page ID #:11349

Case3:14-mc JD Document1 Filed10/30/14 Page1 of 13

Case3:12-cv MEJ Document5 Filed01/18/12 Page1 of 5

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

Case 1:11-mc RLW Document 1 Filed 05/17/11 Page 1 of 14 IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA

Case3:10-cv SI Document235 Filed05/24/12 Page1 of 7

Case3:13-cv SI Document130 Filed12/08/14 Page1 of 14 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

DAVIS WRIGHT TREMAINE LLP

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

Case3:07-md SI Document7618 Filed02/19/13 Page1 of 8

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

Case3:12-cv JCS Document47 Filed09/28/12 Page1 of 8

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA. reasons set forth below, the Court will deny the motion.

Case: 1:13-cv Document #: 419 Filed: 04/24/17 Page 1 of 9 PageID #:6761

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

Case3:12-cv VC Document70 Filed06/23/15 Page1 of 3

SUBPOENA IN AN ADVERSARY PROCEEDING

Case 4:17-cv Document 3-6 Filed in TXSD on 05/30/17 Page 1 of 86 EXHIBIT 1

SUPERIOR COURT OF THE STATE OF CALIFORNIA COUNTY OF SANTA CLARA

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT. Plaintiffs, Defendants.

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT EASTERN DISTRICT OF MICHIGAN NORTHERN DIVISION. Honorable Thomas L. Ludington ORDER DENYING PLAINTIFF S MOTION TO QUASH

Case 3:05-cv MLC-JJH Document 138 Filed 09/08/2006 Page 1 of 10 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT DISTRICT OF NEW JERSEY

Case 5:14-cv BLF Document 163 Filed 01/25/16 Page 1 of 8 SAN JOSE DIVISION

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA CASE NOS.

Case: 1:14-cv TSB Doc #: 10 Filed: 09/26/14 Page: 1 of 8 PAGEID #: 128

Case5:12-cv HRL Document9 Filed08/09/12 Page1 of 5

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA SAN JOSE DIVISION

Case 1:14-cv FB-RLM Document 492 Filed 11/17/16 Page 1 of 11 PageID #: 13817

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT CENTRAL DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) Plaintiff Blizzard Entertainment, Inc. ( Plaintiff or Blizzard )

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

Case3:12-cv VC Document28 Filed07/01/14 Page1 of 11

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT NORTHERN DISTRICT OF OHIO EASTERN 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

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

Case3:11-mc CRB Document11 Filed08/19/11 Page1 of 9 IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA SAN FRANCISCO DIVISION

Case4:07-cv PJH Document672 Filed03/31/10 Page1 of 10

Case 1:11-mc MGC Document 1 Entered on FLSD Docket 07/07/2011 Page 1 of 10 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF FLORIDA

Case 1:16-mc RMC Document 26 Filed 09/13/16 Page 1 of 18 IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA

Case3:12-cv SI Document33 Filed10/21/14 Page1 of 10

Case3:12-cv VC Document77 Filed06/25/15 Page1 of 5

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

Case3:06-mc SI Document105 Filed06/03/10 Page1 of 8 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

No. 138, Original IN THE. STATE OF SOUTH CAROLINA, Plaintiff, v. STATE OF NORTH CAROLINA, Defendant. Before Special Master Kristin Linsley Myles

Case3:13-cv SI Document40 Filed10/18/13 Page1 of 4

Case 2:12-cv JFB-ETB Document 26 Filed 06/19/12 Page 1 of 6 PageID #: 158 CV (JFB)(ETB)

Case 1:17-cv FB-CLP Document 77 Filed 06/07/18 Page 1 of 6 PageID #: 1513

Case 1:11-cv BAH Document 47 Filed 04/06/12 Page 1 of 9 IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT CENTRAL DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

Case 2:05-cv TJW Document 211 Filed 12/21/2005 Page 1 of 11

FOR THE DISTRICT OF ARIZONA ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) )

Case 1:14-cv TSC Document 113 Filed 03/31/16 Page 1 of 13 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA

Case 1:17-mc JMS-KSC Document 25 Filed 10/26/17 Page 1 of 9 PageID #: 255 IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE DISTRICT OF HAWAII

Transcription:

Case:-cv-0-SI Document Filed0// Page of IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA 0 0 HARMEET DHILLON, v. DOES -0, Plaintiff, Defendants. / No. C - SI ORDER DENYING IN PART AND GRANTING IN PART PLAINTIFF S ADMINISTRATIVE MOTIONS FOR LEAVE TO CONDUCT LIMITED THIRD PARTY DISCOVERY; AND CONTINUING CASE MANAGEMENT CONFERENCE TO JANUARY, 0 Plaintiff Harmeet Dhillon filed administrative motions for leave to take limited discovery prior to a Rule (f) conference. Docket Nos. 0 and. Plaintiff seeks to identify Doe defendants named in the complaint who are allegedly responsible for copyright infringement for posting a copyrighted photograph of plaintiff on the website www.mungergames.net. Plaintiff requests leave to serve Rule subpoenas on two third-party sources, Google, Inc. ( Google ) and Michael John Schroeder ( Schroeder ). For the reasons set forth in this order, the Court GRANTS plaintiff leave to serve subpoenas on Google and DENIES plaintiff s request to serve subpoenas on Schroeder. I. Google email addresses Plaintiff seeks leave to serve a subpoena on Google in order to obtain the account information for two email addresses: mungerwatch@gmail.com and themungergames@gmail.com. Plaintiff alleges that these email addresses send updates and information about the Munger Games blog to a list of undisclosed recipients. These email blasts include links that direct recipients back to the Munger Games

Case:-cv-0-SI Document Filed0// Page of 0 website. Dhillon Decl., 0; Park Decl.,. Plaintiff seeks the account information for these email addresses, including the name, address and phone number of the account owner(s), as well as the IP address(es) from which the users created these accounts and signed in and out, with dates and times. Plaintiff believes that this information will enable her to identify the Doe defendant(s) who posted the copyrighted material on the website and facilitate service of process in this action. Rule (d) provides, in part, that [a] party may not seek discovery from any source before the parties have conferred as required by Rule (f), except [...] when authorized by these rules, by stipulation, or by court order. Fed. R. Civ. P. (d)(). Expedited discovery is appropriate under Rule (d) when good cause for the discovery, in consideration of the administration of justice, outweighs the prejudice to the responding party. Semitool, Inc. v. Tokyo Electron America, Inc., 0 F.R.D., (N.D. Cal. 00); UMG Recordings, Inc. v. Does, 00 WL, at * (N.D. Cal. Apr., 00). Courts have recognized that good cause is frequently found in cases involving claims of infringement and unfair competition. Id.; Semitool, Inc.; Pod-Ners, LLC v. N. Feed & Bean of Lucerne Ltd. Liab. Co., 0 F.R.D., (D. Colo. 00). Plaintiff argues that she meets the four factors to show good cause laid out in Columbia Ins. Co. v. Seescandy.com. F.R.D., -0 (N.D. Cal. ). These factors include identifying with sufficient specificity defendant(s) as individuals who can be sued in federal court, recounting all steps taken to locate and identify defendant(s), showing the action could survive a motion to dismiss, and 0 justifying the specific discovery request as reasonably likely to lead to identifying information that will permit service of process. Id. The Court has reviewed plaintiff s papers and supporting documents and finds that plaintiff has established good cause to take early discovery. Accordingly, the Court orders as follows:. IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that plaintiff is allowed to serve immediate discovery on Google, Inc. ( Google ) in order to obtain the identity of the Doe defendants listed in plaintiff s complaint by serving a Rule subpoena on Google that seeks documents sufficient to identify the account information for the email addresses themungergames@gmail.com and mungerwatch@gmail.com, including the name, address and telephone number of the owner(s) of these email addresses and the IP

Case:-cv-0-SI Document Filed0// Page of 0 address(es) from which the user(s) created the account and signed in and signed out, with dates and times.. IT IS FUTHER ORDERED that plaintiff s counsel shall issue a subpoena in substantially the same form as the example attached as Exhibit to Plaintiff's Administrative Motion for Leave to Take Limited Discovery on Google, Inc. Prior to a Rule Conference, with the subpoena including a copy of this Order.. IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that Google will have 0 days from the date of service upon it to serve each entity or person whose information is sought with a copy of the subpoena and a copy of this Order. Google may serve the entities and persons using any reasonable means, including written notice sent to the entity s or person s last known address, transmitted either by first-class mail or overnight service.. IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that each such entity and person and Google will have 0 days from the date of service upon him, her, or it to file any motions in this court contesting the subpoena (including a motion to quash or modify the subpoena). If that 0-day period lapses without the entity contesting the subpoena, Google shall have 0 days to produce to plaintiff the information responsive to the subpoena with respect to that entity.. IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that, because no appearance by a person at a deposition is required by the subpoena, instead only production of documents, records and the like is required, the 0 witness and mileage fees required by Rule (b)() of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure do not apply and no such fees need be tendered.. IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that Google shall not assess any charge to the plaintiff in advance of providing the information requested in the subpoena, and that if Google elects to charge for the costs of production, Google shall provide to plaintiff a billing summary and cost reports that serve as a basis for such billing summary and any costs claimed by Google.. IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that Google shall preserve all subpoenaed information pending its delivering such information to plaintiff or the final resolution of a timely filed and granted motion to quash the subpoena with respect to such information.

Case:-cv-0-SI Document Filed0// Page of. IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that any information disclosed to plaintiff in response to a subpoena may be used by plaintiff solely for the purpose of protecting its rights under the Copyright Act, U.S.C. 0 et seq. II. Michael John Schroeder Plaintiff also seeks leave to serve a subpoena on Michael John Schroeder, an individual and 0 website owner, in order to obtain information that he may have about the identities of the Doe defendants responsible for posting content on the Munger Games website. Plaintiff alleges that Schroeder owns a website that is directly connected with the Munger Games website and that Schroeder possesses information that will enable plaintiff to identify individuals responsible for posting the infringing material on that website. Park Decl., -. The exhibits attached to plaintiff s motion show that Schroeder would be served with the subpoena at 00 W. Town and Country Rd., Ste. 00, Orange, CA, and the subpoena directs Schroeder to produce documents to plaintiff s counsel at Post St., Suite 00, San Francisco, CA 0. Rule directs that a subpoena for production or inspection shall issue from the court for the district in which the production or inspection is to be made. Fed. R. Civ. P. (a)(). Rule also imposes territorial limits upon the area in which a subpoena may be served, directing inter alia, that a subpoena may be served at any place within the district of the court by which it is issued, or at any place 0 without the district that is within 00 miles of the place of the deposition, hearing, trial, production, or inspection specified in the subpoena.... Fed. R. Civ. P. (b)(). Here, the subpoena would be served outside the Northern District of California and would direct Schroeder to produce documents in San Francisco, which is more than 00 miles from the address at which the subpoena would be served. [N]onparties cannot be required to produce documents at a location more than 00 miles from their home or business. Nieman v. LinkedIn Corp., No. CV 0 PSG, 0 WL 0, at * (N.D. Cal. Feb., 0); Miller v. Holzmann, F. Supp. d, (D.D.C. 00) ( [T]he limitation in Rule unequivocally applies both to attending a deposition to testify and to being required to produce documents at a distance more than 00 miles from one s home. ); see also Wright & Miller: Federal

Case:-cv-0-SI Document Filed0// Page of Practice & Procedure, Service of a Subpoena (0); Hon. William W. Schwarzer, Hon. A. Wallace Tashima & James M. Wagstaffe, Federal Civil Procedure Before Trial :0 (0). Accordingly, the Court DENIES plaintiff s request to take limited early discovery on Schroeder. Plaintiff should seek a subpoena from the Central District of California that directs production of documents in Orange County. See id. at :-:0. The Initial Case Management Conference, currently scheduled for November, 0, is continued to January, 0 at :0 p.m. This order resolves Docket Nos. 0 and. 0 IT IS SO ORDERED. Dated: September, 0 SUSAN ILLSTON UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE 0