Digital Sin, Inc. v. Does 1-27
||Digital Sin, Inc.
||May 15, 2012
||New York Southern District Court
||Foley Square Office
||XX Out of State
||Jesse M. Furman
|Nature of Suit:
||Intellectual Property - Copyrights
|Jury Demanded By:
Available Case Documents
The following documents for this case are available for you to view or download.
|Date Filed||#||Document Text|
|June 6, 2012||6|| OPINION AND ORDER PERMITTING LIMITED EXPEDITED DISCOVERY PURSUANT TO A PROTECTIVE ORDER: re: 3 MOTION for Discovery. filed by Digital Sin, Inc. The motion for leave to take expedited discovery is GRANTED, but subject to a protective order. For the foregoing reasons, it is hereby ORDERED that plaintiff may immediately serve a Rule 45 subpoena on the ISPs listed in Exhibit A to the Complaint to obtain information to identify Does 1-27, specifically his or her name, current and permanent address, and Media Access Control address. Plaintiff is expressly not permitted to subpoena the ISPs for the Doe defendants' email addresses or telephone numbers. It is further ORDERED that plaintiff shall serve a copy of this Opinion and Order as well as the attached "Notice to Defendants" along with any subpoenas to the listed ISPs. It is further ORDERED that each ISP will have 60 days from the date of service of the Rule 45 subpoena upon it to serve the relevant Does with a copy of the subpoena, a copy of this Opinion and Order, and a copy of the "Notice to Defendants." The Opinion and Order should be attached to the "Notice to Defendants" such that the "Notice to Defendants" is the first page of the materials enclosed with the subpoena. The ISPs may serve the Does using any reasonable means, including written notice sent to his or her last known address, transmitted either by first-class mail or via overnight service. It is further ORDERED that each Doe defendant shall have 60 days from the date of service of the Rule 45 subpoena and this Opinion and Order upon him or her to file any motions with this Court contesting the subpoena (including a motion to quash or modify the subpoena), as wel l as any request to litigate the subpoena anonymously. The ISPs may not turn over the Doe defendants identifying information to plaintiff before the expiration of this 60-day period. Additionally, if a defendant or ISP files a motion to quash or modi fy the subpoena, or a request to litigate the subpoena anonymously, the ISPs may not turn over any information to plaintiff until the issues have been addressed and the Court issues an order instructing the ISPs to resume in turning over the requeste d discovery. It is further ORDERED that the subpoenaed entity shall preserve any subpoenaed information pending the resolution of any timely filed motion to quash. It is further ORDERED that an ISP that receives a subpoena pursuant to this Opinion an d Order shall confer with plaintiff and shall not assess any charge in advance of providing the information requested in the subpoena. An ISP that receives a subpoena and elects to charge for the costs of production shall provide a billing summary an d cost report to plaintiff. It is further ORDERED that any information ultimately disclosed to plaintiff in response to a Rule 45 subpoena may be used by plaintiff solely for the purpose of protecting plaintiff's rights as set forth in its complaint. (Signed by Judge Jesse M. Furman on 6/6/2012) (jfe)|
Last Document Downloaded: June 7, 2012 06:20:42 PDT
Access additional case information on PACER
Use the links below to access additional information about this case on the US Court's PACER system.
A subscription to PACER