Document ID: s3://data.kl3m.ai/documents/govinfo/USCOURTS/USCOURTS-cand-3_07-cv-04881/USCOURTS-cand-3_07-cv-04881-0/pdf.json

Parties Involved:
BMG Music
Plaintiff
John Doe
Defendant
Interscope Records
Plaintiff
Sony BMG Music Entertainment
Plaintiff
UMG Recordings, Inc.
Plaintiff
Virgin Records America, Inc.
Plaintiff

Document Text:

Ex Parte Application to Continue CMC and [Proposed] Order 

Case No. 3:07-cv-04881-JSW 

#34600 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, 

INTERSCOPE RECORDS; UMG 

RECORDINGS, INC.; SONY BMG 

MUSIC ENTERTAINMENT; VIRGIN 

RECORDS AMERICA, INC.; and BMG 

MUSIC 

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 

NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA 

SAN FRANCISCO DIVISION 

INTERSCOPE RECORDS, a California general 

partnership; UMG RECORDINGS, INC., a 

Delaware corporation; SONY BMG MUSIC 

ENTERTAINMENT, a Delaware general 

partnership; VIRGIN RECORDS AMERICA, 

INC., a California corporation; and BMG 

MUSIC, a New York general partnership, 

Plaintiffs, 

v. 

JOHN DOE, 

Defendant. 

CASE NO. 3:07-CV-04881-JSW 

Honorable Jeffrey S. White 

EX PARTE APPLICATION TO CONTINUE 

CASE MANAGEMENT CONFERENCE 

AND [PROPOSED] ORDER 

Case 3:07-cv-04881-JSW Document 10 Filed 01/02/08 Page 1 of 3
 1 

Ex Parte Application to Continue CMC and [Proposed] Order 

Case No. 3:07-cv-04881-JSW 

#34600 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 that the Court continue the case management conference 

currently set for January 4, 2008, at 1:30 p.m. to April 4, 2008. As further explained below, there is 

not yet a named defendant in this case, and Plaintiffs do not yet know the true identity of Defendant 

John Doe (“Defendant”). 

Plaintiffs filed the Complaint against Defendant on September 20, 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 – here, University of San Francisco (“USF”). Accordingly, also on September 20, 

2007, Plaintiffs filed their Ex Parte Application for Leave to Take Immediate Discovery, seeking the 

Court’s permission to serve a Rule 45 subpoena on USF so that Plaintiffs could discover information 

sufficient to identify Defendant. On October 9, 2007, this Court issued its Order Granting Plaintiffs’ 

Ex Parte Application for Leave to Take Immediate Discovery authorizing Plaintiffs to serve a Rule 

45 subpoena on USF. 

On November 30, 2007, USF responded to several subpoenas served by Plaintiffs in 

conjunction with this case and other similar cases. However , USF did not provide Plaintiffs with 

information permitting Plaintiffs to identify Defendant in this particular case. Since that time 

Plaintiffs, have been in communication with USF and are attempting to determine whether USF 

possesses further information that would allow Plaintiffs to identify Defendant. If Plaintiffs 

determine that USF does not have such information, Plaintiffs will promptly file a notice of 

dismissal without prejudice pursuant to Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 41. If Plaintiffs are able to 

identify Defendant, Plaintiffs will attempt to contact Defendant and attempt to resolve this dispute. 

/// 

/// 

/// 

/// 

/// 

/// 

/// 

Case 3:07-cv-04881-JSW Document 10 Filed 01/02/08 Page 2 of 3
 2 

Ex Parte Application to Continue CMC and [Proposed] Order 

Case No. 3:07-cv-04881-JSW 

#34600 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 

However, because there is not yet a named defendant in this case and Plaintiffs do not yet 

know Defendant’s true identity, a case management conference is unnecessary at this time. 

Plaintiffs therefore respectfully request that the Court continue the case management conference 

currently set for January 4, 2008, at 1:30 p.m. to April 4, 2008. 

Dated: December 21, 2007 HOLME ROBERTS & OWEN LLP 

By: _________/s/ Matthew Franklin Jaksa___

MATTHEW FRANKLIN JAKSA 

Attorney for Plaintiffs 

ORDER

 Good cause having been shown: 

IT IS ORDERED that the case management conference currently set for January 4, 2008, at 

1:30 p.m. be continued to April 4, 2008. 

Dated: ___________________ By: _____________________________ 

 Honorable Jeffrey S. White 

 United States District Judge 

January 2, 2008

Case 3:07-cv-04881-JSW Document 10 Filed 01/02/08 Page 3 of 3