Dallas Buyers Club, LLC v. Doe-173.11.1.241

Justia Dockets & Filings Ninth Circuit Oregon District Court Dallas Buyers Club, LLC v. Doe-173.11.1.241

Dallas Buyers Club, LLC v. Doe-173.11.1.241

Plaintiff:	Dallas Buyers Club, LLC
Defendant:	Doe-173.11.1.241
Case Number:	3:2015cv00907
Filed:	May 27, 2015
Court:	US District Court for the District of Oregon
Office:	Portland (3) Office
Presiding Judge:	John V. Acosta
Nature of Suit:	Copyright
Cause of Action:	17 U.S.C. § 101 Copyright Infringement
Jury Demanded By:	Plaintiff

Follow case documents by RSS

Available Case Documents

The following documents for this case are available for you to view or download:

Date Filed	Document Text
February 6, 2017	Filing 95 Opinion and Order - The Findings and Recommendation (ECF 89 ) is ADOPTED IN PART, as explained in this Opinion and Order. Plaintiff's Motion to Strike (ECF 72 ) is GRANTED IN PART. This motion is denied with respect to its request that Defenda nt's Answer be stricken in its entirety, but is granted in that Defendant's assertions in his Answer relating to his health and to settlement negotiations between the parties are STRICKEN. Plaintiff's Spoliation Motion (ECF 75 ) is GR ANTED IN PART. The Court finds that Defendant destroyed evidence and that the sanction of an adverse inference instruction is warranted. Accordingly, the Court orders that the jury shall be instructed as follows: Defendant John Huszar has failed to p reserve computer hard drives that may have contained evidence relevant to this case. You may presume that the lost evidence was favorable to Plaintiff. Whether this finding is important to you in reaching a verdict in this case is for you to decide. Signed on 2/6/2017 by Judge Michael H. Simon. (mja)
May 31, 2016	Filing 59 ORDER - The Court ADOPTS Judge Acosta's Amended Findings and Recommendation (Dkt. 53 ). Dallas's Motion to File an Amended Complaint (Dkt. 37 ) is GRANTED IN PART AND DENIED IN PART. Dallas's proposed amendment adding facts p urporting to show spoliation is granted. Dallas's request to remove Integrity and substitute Huszar as the defendant is granted, but only with respect to Integrity's claims for direct and indirect copyright infringement. Dallas's third claim for failure to register an assumed business name is dismissed with prejudice. Signed on 5/31/2016 by Judge Michael H. Simon. (mja)

Date Filed

Document Text

February 6, 2017

Filing 95 Opinion and Order - The Findings and Recommendation (ECF 89 ) is ADOPTED IN PART, as explained in this Opinion and Order. Plaintiff's Motion to Strike (ECF 72 ) is GRANTED IN PART. This motion is denied with respect to its request that Defenda nt's Answer be stricken in its entirety, but is granted in that Defendant's assertions in his Answer relating to his health and to settlement negotiations between the parties are STRICKEN. Plaintiff's Spoliation Motion (ECF 75 ) is GR ANTED IN PART. The Court finds that Defendant destroyed evidence and that the sanction of an adverse inference instruction is warranted. Accordingly, the Court orders that the jury shall be instructed as follows: Defendant John Huszar has failed to p reserve computer hard drives that may have contained evidence relevant to this case. You may presume that the lost evidence was favorable to Plaintiff. Whether this finding is important to you in reaching a verdict in this case is for you to decide. Signed on 2/6/2017 by Judge Michael H. Simon. (mja)

May 31, 2016

Filing 59 ORDER - The Court ADOPTS Judge Acosta's Amended Findings and Recommendation (Dkt. 53 ). Dallas's Motion to File an Amended Complaint (Dkt. 37 ) is GRANTED IN PART AND DENIED IN PART. Dallas's proposed amendment adding facts p urporting to show spoliation is granted. Dallas's request to remove Integrity and substitute Huszar as the defendant is granted, but only with respect to Integrity's claims for direct and indirect copyright infringement. Dallas's third claim for failure to register an assumed business name is dismissed with prejudice. Signed on 5/31/2016 by Judge Michael H. Simon. (mja)

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 is required.

Access this case on the Oregon District Court's Electronic Court Filings (ECF) System

Search for this case: Dallas Buyers Club, LLC v. Doe-173.11.1.241
Search News	[ Google News \| Marketwatch \| Wall Street Journal \| Financial Times \| New York Times ]
Search Web	[ Unicourt \| Legal Web \| Google \| Bing \| Yahoo \| Ask ]
Plaintiff: Dallas Buyers Club, LLC
Represented By:	Carl D. Crowell
Represented By:	Drew P. Taylor
Search News	[ Google News \| Marketwatch \| Wall Street Journal \| Financial Times \| New York Times ]
Search Finance	[ Google Finance \| Yahoo Finance \| Hoovers \| SEC Edgar Filings ]
Search Web	[ Unicourt \| Justia Dockets \| Legal Web \| Google \| Bing \| Yahoo \| Ask ]
Defendant: Doe-173.11.1.241
Search News	[ Google News \| Marketwatch \| Wall Street Journal \| Financial Times \| New York Times ]
Search Finance	[ Google Finance \| Yahoo Finance \| Hoovers \| SEC Edgar Filings ]
Search Web	[ Unicourt \| Justia Dockets \| Legal Web \| Google \| Bing \| Yahoo \| Ask ]

Disclaimer: Justia Dockets & Filings provides public litigation records from the federal appellate and district courts. These filings and docket sheets should not be considered findings of fact or liability, nor do they necessarily reflect the view of Justia.

Why Is My Information Online?