Patrick Collins, Inc. v. Does 1-2590
Filing
21
ORDER FOR PLAINTIFF TO RESPOND re 20 MOTION to Dismiss filed by Doe Defendant at IP address 24.215.237.108.. Signed by Judge Maria-Elena James on 11/3/2011. (cdnS, COURT STAFF) (Filed on 11/3/2011)
1
2
3
4
5
6
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
7
Northern District of California
8
9
PATRICK COLLINS, INC.,
No. C 11-2766 MEJ
10
Plaintiff,
v.
12
For the Northern District of California
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
11
DOES 1-2,590,
13
ORDER RE MOTION TO DISMISS
(IP ADDRESS 24.215.237.108)
Defendants.
_____________________________________/
Docket No. 20
14
15
On June 7, 2011, Plaintiff Patrick Collins, Inc. filed this lawsuit against 2,590 Doe
16
Defendants, alleging that Defendants illegally reproduced and distributed a work subject to
17
Plaintiff’s exclusive license, (“Real Female Orgasms 10”), using an internet peer-to-peer file sharing
18
network known as BitTorrent, thereby violating the Copyright Act, 17 U.S.C. § 101-1322. Compl.
19
¶¶ 6-15, Dkt. No. 1. On September 22, 2011, the Court granted Plaintiff’s Application for Leave to
20
Take Limited Expedited Discovery. Dkt. No. 12. The Court permitted Plaintiff to serve subpoenas
21
on Does 1-2,590’s Internet Service Providers (“ISPs”) by serving a Federal Rule of Civil Procedure
22
45 subpoena that seeks information sufficient to identify the Doe Defendants, including the name,
23
address, telephone number, and email address of Does 1-2,590. Id. at 11. Once the ISPs provided
24
Does 1-2,590 with a copy of the subpoena, the Court permitted Does 1-2,590 30 days from the date
25
of service to file any motions contesting the subpoena (including a motion to quash or modify the
26
subpoena). Id.
27
28
Now before the Court is a Motion to Dismiss, filed by a Doe Defendant (I.P. Address
1
24.215.237.108).1 Dkt. No. 20. In his motion, Doe requests that the subpoena be quashed as to him
2
and the case against him dismissed because the Court lacks jurisdiction and venue is improper.
3
Based on the information presented in Doe’s motion, it appears that the Court lacks jurisdiction.
4
Accordingly, the Court hereby ORDERS Plaintiff to either: (1) file a voluntary dismissal of Doe
5
Defendant at I.P. Address 24.215.237.108, without prejudice to filing a complaint against him/her in
6
the proper jurisdiction; or (2) show cause why the Court should not grant Doe’s motion to dismiss.
7
Plaintiff shall file its response by November 14, 2011.
8
IT IS SO ORDERED.
9
10
Dated: November 3, 2011
_______________________________
Maria-Elena James
Chief United States Magistrate Judge
12
For the Northern District of California
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
11
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
1
28
The Doe Defendant does not identify him/herself by Doe Number.
2
Disclaimer: Justia Dockets & Filings provides public litigation records from the federal appellate and district courts. These filings and docket sheets should not be considered findings of fact or liability, nor do they necessarily reflect the view of Justia.
Why Is My Information Online?