Source: s3://data.kl3m.ai/documents/govinfo/USCOURTS/USCOURTS-cand-3_07-cv-04121/USCOURTS-cand-3_07-cv-04121-2/pdf.json

Nature of Suit Code: 820
Nature of Suit: Copyright
Cause of Action: 17:501 Copyright Infringement

---

Ex Parte Application and [Proposed] Order 

Case No. C 07-04121 MMC 

#34832 v1

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

Matthew Franklin Jaksa (CA State Bar No. 248072) 

HOLME ROBERTS & OWEN LLP

560 Mission Street, 25th Floor 

San Francisco, CA 94105-2994 

Telephone: (415) 268-2000 

Facsimile: (415) 268-1999 

Email: matt.jaksa@hro.com 

Attorneys for Plaintiffs, 

LAFACE RECORDS LLC; UMG RECORDINGS, 

INC.; SONY BMG MUSIC ENTERTAINMENT; 

and MOTOWN RECORD COMPANY, L.P. 

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 

NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA 

SAN FRANCISCO DIVISION 

LAFACE RECORDS LLC, a Delaware limited 

liability company; UMG RECORDINGS, INC., 

a Delaware corporation; SONY BMG MUSIC 

ENTERTAINMENT, a Delaware general 

partnership; and MOTOWN RECORD 

COMPANY, L.P., a California limited 

partnership,

Plaintiffs,

v.

JOHN DOE, 

Defendant.

CASE NO. C 07-04121 MMC 

The Honorable Maxine M. Chesney 

EX PARTE APPLICATION TO EXTEND 

TIME TO SERVE DEFENDANT AND 

[PROPOSED] ORDER 

Case 3:07-cv-04121-MMC Document 13 Filed 01/14/08 Page 1 of 4
Ex Parte Application and [Proposed] Order 

Case No. C 07-04121 MMC 

#34832 v1

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

Plaintiffs respectfully request, pursuant to the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure, Rules 4(m) 

and 6(b)(1)(A), that the Court grant an additional 90 days to serve Defendant with the Summons and 

Complaint. As further explained below, Plaintiffs do not yet know the true identity of the Doe 

defendant in this case. In support of their request, Plaintiffs state as follows: 

1. The current deadline for service of process on Defendant is January 15, 2008.

The initial case management conference is scheduled for February 15, 2008. Both the case 

management conference and the service deadline were previously continued upon Plaintiffs’ request 

by the Court’s Order of November 9, 2007. 

2. Plaintiffs filed their Complaint for Copyright Infringement against Defendant 

John Doe (“Defendant”) on August 9, 2007. Plaintiffs did not have sufficient identifying 

information to name Defendant in the Complaint, but were able to identify Defendant by the Internet 

Protocol address assigned to Defendant by Defendant’s Internet Service Provider (“ISP”) – here, 

University of California, Santa Cruz.

3. In order to determine Defendant’s true name and identity, Plaintiffs filed their 

Ex Parte Application for Leave to Take Immediate Discovery on August 9, 2007, requesting that the 

Court enter an Order allowing Plaintiffs to serve a Rule 45 subpoena on the ISP.

4. The Court entered an Order for Leave to take Immediate Discovery on August 

22, 2007, which was served upon the ISP along with a Rule 45 subpoena. 

5. The ISP responded to the subpoena on November 28, 2007, but unfortunately 

did not identify this Defendant. Plaintiffs have since contacted the ISP several times in hopes of 

obtaining the identity of Defendant, but have so far not received a response to their inquiries. In the 

absence of identification by the ISP, Plaintiffs cannot learn the true identity of the individual 

infringing on their rights under the Copyright statutes. 

6. Plaintiffs previously applied for an extension of time for service from the 

original service deadline of December 7, 2007 in anticipation of receiving identification of the Doe 

Defendant pursuant to the subpoena on November 28, 2007. 

Case 3:07-cv-04121-MMC Document 13 Filed 01/14/08 Page 2 of 4
Ex Parte Application and [Proposed] Order 

Case No. C 07-04121 MMC 

#34832 v1

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

7. There is not a sufficient amount of time prior to the service deadline for the 

ISP to respond with the true name and address of the Doe Defendant and for Plaintiffs then to notify 

Defendant of their claim, attempt to resolve the dispute, and/or amend the complaint to name 

Defendant personally and serve Defendant with the Summons and Complaint. 

8. If Plaintiffs are unable to learn Defendant’s true identity, Plaintiffs will 

promptly file a notice of dismissal without prejudice. 

9. Given the circumstances of this case, Plaintiffs respectfully request an 

additional 90 days to effectuate service. 

10. Plaintiffs’ submit that the filing of their Ex Parte Application for Leave to 

Take Immediate Discovery demonstrates “good cause” under Rule 4 for an extension of time for 

service. See Ritts v. Dealers Alliance Credit Corp., 989 F. Supp. 1475, 1479 (N.D. Ga. 1997) 

(stating good cause standard for service extensions). Unlike a traditional case in which the 

defendant is known by name and efforts to serve can begin immediately after filing the complaint, in 

this case Plaintiffs will be unable to proceed unless and until they first obtain the Doe defendant’s 

identity from the ISP. This Court has discretion to enlarge the time to serve even where there is no 

good cause shown. Henderson v. United States, 517 U.S. 654, 658 n. 5 (1996). 

11. Because the copyright infringements here occurred in 2007, the three-year 

limitations period for these claims has not expired. See 17 U.S.C. § 507(b) (2000). There can thus 

be no prejudice to the Defendant from any delay in serving the Complaint. 

12. Plaintiffs therefore request that the time to serve the Summons and Complaint 

on the Defendant be extended an additional 90 days. 

Dated: January 11, 2008 HOLME ROBERTS & OWEN LLP 

By: /s/ Matthew Franklin Jaksa______

MATTHEW FRANKLIN JAKSA 

Attorney for Plaintiffs 

Case 3:07-cv-04121-MMC Document 13 Filed 01/14/08 Page 3 of 4
 1 

Ex Parte Application and [Proposed] Order 

Case No. C 07-04121 MMC 

#34832 v1

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

ORDER

 Good cause having been shown: 

IT IS ORDERED that, pursuant to the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure, Rules 4(m) and 

6(b)(1), Plaintiffs’ time to serve the Summons and Complaint on Defendant be extended to April 14, 

2008.

Dated: ___________________ By: _____________________________ 

Honorable Maxine M. Chesney 

United States District Judge 

Additionally, the February 15, 2008 Case Management Conference is continued to May 16,

2008. The parties shall file a Joint Case Management Statement no later than May 9, 2008.

January 14, 2008

Case 3:07-cv-04121-MMC Document 13 Filed 01/14/08 Page 4 of 4