Source: s3://data.kl3m.ai/documents/govinfo/USCOURTS/USCOURTS-cand-3_15-cv-03391/USCOURTS-cand-3_15-cv-03391-2/pdf.json

Nature of Suit Code: 840
Nature of Suit: Trademark
Cause of Action: 15:1114 Trademark Infringement

---

United States District Court

For the Northern District of California

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25

26

27

28

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

FOR THE NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

DHC USA INCORPORATED, a California

corporation, and DHC CORPORATION, a

Japanese corporation,

Plaintiffs,

 v.

LA SERENE GLOBAL, a California

corporation, doing business as Linda Vista

Beauty Nest, TRACY TSE, an individual,

and JOHN DOES 1–10,

Defendants. /

No. C 15-03391 WHA

ORDER RE MOTION FOR

LEAVE TO CONDUCT

DISCOVERY PRIOR TO RULE

26(f) CONFERENCE

Plaintiffs DHC USA Incorporated and DHC Corporation have moved for leave to

conduct discovery prior to the Rule 26(f) conference. Specifically, plaintiffs seek to conduct

discovery for the limited purpose of identifying the unnamed Doe defendants, who allegedly

registered an unauthorized DHC brand store on the website Amazon.com, and used that store to

sell goods that infringed plaintiffs’ trademarks. Plaintiffs intend to serve a subpoena on

Amazon.com, Inc., for documents demonstrating the personal information, as well as IP

addresses and MAC addresses, of the persons who registered the DHC brand store on Amazon’s

website. Plaintiffs also seek leave to conduct additional discovery, such as by serving

subpoenas on individuals who might have registered the store on Doe defendants’ behalf or on

Internet Service Providers.

Case 3:15-cv-03391-WHA Document 24 Filed 10/06/15 Page 1 of 2
United States District Court

For the Northern District of California

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25

26

27

28

2

Good cause shown, plaintiffs’ request to conduct discovery by serving a document

subpoena on Amazon is GRANTED. Any information disclosed by Amazon may only be used

for the limited purpose of identifying the unnamed Doe defendants. Plaintiffs have not made a

sufficient showing that additional discovery is likely to lead to identifying information. 

Accordingly, plaintiffs’ request as to unspecified additional discovery is DENIED. This is

without prejudice to a renewed motion following the results of any production from Amazon.

IT IS SO ORDERED.

Dated: October 6, 2015. 

WILLIAM ALSUP

UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE

Case 3:15-cv-03391-WHA Document 24 Filed 10/06/15 Page 2 of 2