Source: s3://data.kl3m.ai/documents/govinfo/USCOURTS/USCOURTS-casd-3_07-cv-01570/USCOURTS-casd-3_07-cv-01570-0/pdf.json

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

---

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

- 1 - 07cv1570

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

CAPITOL RECORDS, INC., a Delaware

corporation; INTERSCOPE RECORDS, a

California general partnership; SONY BMG

MUSICA ENTERTAINMENT, a Delaware

general partnership; UMG RECORDINGS

INC., a Delaware corporation; BMG MUSIC, a

New York general partnership; WARNER

BROS. RECORDS INC., a Delaware

corporation,

Civil No. 07-cv-1570-JM (POR)

Plaintiffs, ORDER GRANTING PLAINTIFFS’ EX

PARTE APPLICATION FOR LEAVE

TO TAKE IMMEDIATE DISCOVERY

[Docket No. 3]

v.

JOHN DOE,

Defendant.

On August 9, 2007, Plaintiffs filed a complaint against the Doe Defendant for copyright

infringement, alleging that Defendant used an online media distribution system to download and

distribute copyrighted works. Plaintiffs do not know the name of the Doe Defendant, but have

identified the unique Internet Protocol address assigned to Defendant at the date and time of the

alleged infringing activity and have also identified the Internet Service Provider that provided

Defendant with internet access at the date and time of the alleged infringing activity. Simultaneous

to their complaint, Plaintiffs have filed an Ex Parte Application seeking leave of the Court to serve

immediate discovery on the Internet Service Provider, the University of California, San Diego, to

identify Defendant. Plaintiffs intend to serve a subpoena pursuant to Federal Rule of Civil

Procedure 45 on the University of California, San Diego, seeking documents that identify

Case 3:07-cv-01570-JM-POR Document 4 Filed 08/24/07 Page 1 of 3
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 - 07cv1570

Defendant’s true name, current and permanent addresses and telephone numbers, e-mail addresses,

and Media Access Control addresses.

In accordance with Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 26(d), discovery does not commence

until parties to an action meet and confer as prescribed by Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 26(f),

unless by court order or agreement of the parties. A court order permitting early discovery may be

appropriate “where the need for expedited discovery, in consideration of the administration of

justice, outweighs the prejudice to the responding party.” Semitool, Inc. v. Tokyo Electron

America, Inc., 208 F.R.D. 273, 276 (N.D.Cal. 2002). 

After reviewing Plaintiffs’ Ex Parte Application to take discovery, the declaration of Carlos

Linares, and the accompanying Memorandum of Law, the Court finds good cause to grant Plaintiffs’

Application, based on: (1) the allegations of copyright infringement contained in Plaintiffs

complaint; (2) the danger that the University of California, San Diego will not preserve the

information that Plaintiffs seek; (3) the narrow tailoring of the discovery request so as not to exceed

the minimum information required to advance this lawsuit without prejudicing the Defendant; and

(4) the Court’s finding that the expedited discovery requested will substantially contribute to moving

this case forward. Furthermore, without such discovery, Plaintiffs cannot identify the Doe

Defendant, and thus cannot pursue their lawsuit to protect their copyrighted works from

infringement. Accordingly, IT IS HEREBY ORDERED:

1. Plaintiffs may serve immediate discovery on the University of California, San Diego

to obtain the identity of the Doe Defendant by serving a subpoena pursuant to Federal

Rule of Civil Procedure 45 that seeks information sufficient to identify the Doe

Defendant, including the name, current and permanent addresses and telephone

numbers, e-mail addresses, and Media Access Control addresses for the Defendant.

2. Any information disclosed to Plaintiffs in response to the subpoena may be used by

Plaintiffs solely for the purpose of protecting Plaintiffs’ rights under the Copyright

Act.

3. If the University of California, San Diego and/or the Defendant wishes to move to

quash the subpoena, they shall do so before the return date of the subpoena. If such a

Case 3:07-cv-01570-JM-POR Document 4 Filed 08/24/07 Page 2 of 3
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

- 3 - 07cv1570

motion is brought, the University of California, San Diego shall nonetheless preserve

the information sought in the subpoena pending resolution of such motion.

4. Plaintiffs shall provide a copy of this Order to the University of California, San Diego

when the subpoena is served. 

 

DATED: August 23, 2007

LOUISA S PORTER

United States Magistrate Judge

cc: Honorable Jeffrey T. Miller

All parties

Case 3:07-cv-01570-JM-POR Document 4 Filed 08/24/07 Page 3 of 3