1

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 

FOR THE NORTHERN DISTRICT OF ILLINOIS, EASTERN DIVISION

GRANT BIRCHMEIER, STEPHEN PARKES, 

and REGINA STONE, on behalf of themselves 

and a class of others similarly situated,

Plaintiffs,

v.

CARIBBEAN CRUISE LINE, INC., ECONOMIC 

STRATEGY GROUP, ECONOMIC STRATEGY 

GROUP, INC., ECONOMIC STRATEGY, LLC, 

THE BERKLEY GROUP, INC., and VACATION 

OWNERSHIP MARKETING TOURS, INC., 

Defendants.

Case No. 1:12-cv-04069

Honorable Matthew F. Kennelly

PLAINTIFFS’ UNOPPOSED MOTION FOR ORDER COMPELLING SPRINT PCS 

TO PRODUCE CALIFORNIA SUBSCRIBER RECORDS

Plaintiffs Grant Birchmeier, Stephen Parkes, and Regina Stone (collectively the “Plaintiffs”), 

by and through Class Counsel, hereby submit this unopposed Motion requesting that the Court 

enter an order requiring non-party Sprint PCS (“Sprint”) to produce the name and address 

information of its California subscribers in response to Plaintiffs’ October 30, 2014 Subpoena. In 

support of the instant Motion, Plaintiffs state as follows: 

1. On August 18, 2014, the Court entered an order certifying two Classes—a landline 

Class and cellular telephone Class—consisting of “All persons in the United States to whom 1) one 

or more telephone calls made by, on behalf of, or for the benefit of the Defendants, (2) purportedly 

offering a free cruise in exchange for taking an automated public opinion and/or political survey, (3) 

which delivered a message using a prerecorded or artificial voice, (4) between August 2011 and 

August 2012, (5) and your (i) telephone number appears in Defendants’ records of those calls 

and/or the records of their third party telephone carriers or the third party telephone carriers of 

Case: 1:12-cv-04069 Document #: 262 Filed: 12/17/14 Page 1 of 5 PageID #:5177
2

their call centers or (ii) your own records prove that you received the calls – such as your telephone 

records, bills, and/or recordings of the calls – and you submit an affidavit or claim form if necessary 

to describe the content of the call.” (Dkt. 241 at 31.) 

2. Thereafter, Plaintiffs proposed a Notice Plan in which they would endeavor, inter 

alia, to obtain the names and addresses of Class members whose telephone numbers appeared in 

Defendants’ records by serving subpoenas on certain wireless telephone carriers. (Dkt. 247.)

3. As part of these efforts, on October 30, 2014, Plaintiffs’ Counsel issued a subpoena 

to Sprint requesting such information for the 44,194 numbers (the “Subpoena”) on Defendants list 

identified by Neustar, Inc. as belonging to Sprint. (A true and accurate copy of Plaintiffs’ October 

30, 2014 Subpoena to Sprint is attached hereto as Exhibit A.)

4. Sprint produced the subscriber information for each of the requested telephone 

numbers, with the exception of the subscriber information for individuals who resided in California. 

Sprint withheld subscriber information for California residents based on California Public Utility 

Code § 2891 and California Rule of Civil Procedure § 1985.3, and stated that a Court order or 

customer consent would be required for those records.

1 (See December 5, 2014 Email from Ms. Cali 

Keep, a true and accurate copy of which is attached hereto as Exhibit B.)

5. Sprint subsequently agreed not to oppose Plaintiffs’ request for a Court order 

directing Sprint to produce the California records. (See December 5-17, 2014 Email Chain between 

Plaintiffs’ Counsel and Counsel for Sprint a true and accurate copy of which is attached hereto as 

Exhibit C.)

																																																							 1 Given that Sprint has agreed to produce records of its California subscribers whose numbers 

appear in Plaintiffs’ Subpoena so long as an order is entered, Counsel for Plaintiffs take no position 

as to whether the above-mentioned rules require Sprint to obtain consent from their California 

subscribers before producing the requested records, and reserve their right to argue that such 

consent is not necessary if other carriers withhold records based on the same statute. 

Case: 1:12-cv-04069 Document #: 262 Filed: 12/17/14 Page 2 of 5 PageID #:5178
3

6. As such, and as discussed with the Court during the recent December 11, 2014 

Status Hearing, Plaintiffs now request that the Court enter an order requiring Sprint to comply with 

Plaintiff’s Subpoena by instructing Sprint to produce the names and last known home and email 

address(es) for the subscriber numbers identified by Neustar as being owned and operated by Sprint 

on the date those numbers received the calls at issue in this case.

2

7. Counsel for Plaintiffs have conferred with Defendants and representatives for nonparty Sprint, all of whom have indicated that they do not oppose Plaintiffs’ request for such an 

order.

8. WHEREFORE, Plaintiffs respectfully request that the Court enter an order 

instructing Sprint to comply with their October 30, 2014 Subpoena by producing the remaining 

names and last known home and email address(es) for the California subscribers whose numbers

received the calls at issue in this case on the dates identified in Plaintiffs’ Subpoena. 

Date: December 17, 2014 By: /s/Eve-Lynn J. Rapp

Jay Edelson

jedelson@edelson.com

Rafey S. Balabanian

rbalabanian@edelson.com

Eve-Lynn J. Rapp

erapp@edelson.com

EDELSON PC

350 North LaSalle Street, Suite 1300

Chicago, Illinois 60654

Tel: 312.589.6370

Fax: 312.589.6378

Class Counsel

Scott R. Rauscher

scott@loevy.com

Michael I. Kanovitz

mike@loevy.com

Jonathan I. Loevy

jon@loevy.com

LOEVY & LOEVY

312 N. May Street, Suite 100

Chicago, Illinois 60607

Tel: 312.243.5900

Fax: 312.243.5902 

 

Class Counsel

																																																							 2 A [proposed] agreed order is attached hereto as Exhibit D. 

Case: 1:12-cv-04069 Document #: 262 Filed: 12/17/14 Page 3 of 5 PageID #:5179
4

Scott D. Owens

scott@scottdowens.com

LAW OFFICES OF SCOTT D. OWENS, ESQ.

664 East Hallandale Beach Boulevard

Hallandale, Florida 33009

Tel: (954) 306-8104 

 

Counsel for Stone

Case: 1:12-cv-04069 Document #: 262 Filed: 12/17/14 Page 4 of 5 PageID #:5180
CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE 

I, Eve-Lynn J. Rapp, an attorney, hereby certify that on December 17, 2014, I served the 

above and foregoing Plaintiffs’ Unopposed Motion for Order Compelling Sprint PCS to Produce California 

Subscriber Records by causing a true and accurate copy of such paper to be transmitted to all counsel 

of record via electronic mail, on this the 17th of December, 2014. 

/s/ Eve-Lynn J. Rapp

Case: 1:12-cv-04069 Document #: 262 Filed: 12/17/14 Page 5 of 5 PageID #:5181