Dhillon v. Doe 1 et al

Filing 8

AMENDED ORDER re 6 Order on Ex Parte Application for Leave to Take Limited Discovery. Signed by Judge Joseph C. Spero on 4/9/13. (klhS, COURT STAFF) (Filed on 4/9/2013)

Download PDF
1 2 3 4 5 6 HAROLD P. SMITH, ESQ. (SBN: 126985) psmith@dhillonsmith.com KRISTA L. SHOQUIST, ESQ. (SBN: 264600) kshoquist@dhillonsmith.com DHILLON & SMITH LLP 177 Post Street, Suite 700 San Francisco, California 94108 Telephone: (415) 433-1700 Facsimile: (415) 520-6593 7 8 9 Attorneys for Plaintiff Harmeet K. Dhillon 10 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 11 NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA 12 San Francisco Division 13 14 HARMEET K. DHILLON, Case No. 13-01465-JCS 15 16 17 AMENDED1 [PROPOSED] ORDER GRANTING PLAINTIFF’S EX PARTE APPLICATION FOR LEAVE TO TAKE LIMITED DISCOVERY PRIOR TO A RULE 26(f) CONFERENCE Plaintiff, v. 18 19 DOE 1, an unknown individual, et al., Defendants. 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 Plaintiff’s Ex Parte Application For Leave to Take Limited Discovery Prior to a Rule 26(f) Conference, filed April 2, 2013 (Doc. 2), sought leave to serve a subpoena on “New Dream Network, LLC, on behalf of DreamHost.” However, the original [Proposed] Order submitted with that ex parte application (Doc. 2-1), and the subsequent Order filed on April 3, 2013 (Doc. 6), contained a typographical error with respect to the name of the subpoenaed entity, listing it as “DreamHost Network, LLC, on behalf of DreamHost.” Plaintiff thus respectfully requests that the Court remedy this error by granting this Amended [Proposed] Order, which is identical in substance to the Court’s Order of April 3rd, other than with respect to the name of the entity to be subpoenaed. 1 _____________________________________________________________________________ Amended [Proposed] Order 1 DHILLON & SMITH LLP 1 The Court, having reviewed Plaintiff’s Ex Parte Application for Leave to Take 2 Limited Discovery Prior to a Rule 26 Conference and the supporting documents 3 submitted therewith, and good cause appearing therefore, hereby grants Plaintiff’s Ex 4 Parte Application and orders as follows: 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 1. IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that Plaintiff is allowed to serve immediate discovery on New Dream Network, LLC, on behalf of DreamHost, in order to obtain the identity of the Doe Defendants listed in Plaintiff’s Complaint by serving a Rule 45 subpoena that seeks information sufficient to identify each such Defendant, including the account information for the domain name “Mungergames.net,” hosted by DreamHost, and the name, addresses, telephone numbers, and email addresses of each 12 such Defendant. 13 2. IT IS FUTHER ORDERED that Plaintiff's counsel shall issue subpoena(s) 14 in substantially the same form as the example attached as Exhibit 1 to Plaintiff's Ex Parte 15 Application for Leave to Take Limited Discovery Prior to a Rule 26 Conference, with 16 each subpoena including a copy of this Order. 17 3. IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that New Dream Network, LLC, will have 30 18 days from the date of service upon it to serve each entity or person whose information 19 is sought with a copy of the subpoena and a copy of this Order. New Dream Network, 20 LLC may serve the entities and persons using any reasonable means, including written 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 notice sent to the entity’s or person’s last known address, transmitted either by firstclass mail or overnight service. 4. IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that each entity and person and New Dream Network, LLC, will have 30 days from the date of service upon him, her, or it to file any motions in this court contesting the subpoena (including a motion to quash or modify the subpoena). If that 30-day period lapses without the entity contesting the subpoena, 28 _____________________________________________________________________________ Amended [Proposed] Order 2 DHILLON & SMITH LLP 1 New Dream Network, LLC, shall have 10 days to produce to Plaintiff the information 2 responsive to the subpoena with respect to that entity. 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 5. IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that, because no appearance by a person at a deposition is required by the subpoena, instead only production of documents, records and the like is required, the witness and mileage fees required by Rule 45(b)(1) of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure do not apply and no such fees need be tendered. 6. IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that New Dream Network, LLC, shall not assess any charge to the Plaintiff in advance of providing the information requested in the subpoena, and that if New Dream Network, LLC, elects to charge for the costs of production, it shall provide a billing summary and cost reports that serve as a basis for such billing summary and any costs claimed by such recipient. 7. IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that New Dream Network, LLC, shall 14 preserve all subpoenaed information pending its delivering such information to 15 Plaintiff or the final resolution of a timely filed and granted motion to quash the 16 subpoena with respect to such information. 17 8. IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that any information disclosed to Plaintiff in 18 response to a subpoena may be used by Plaintiff solely for the purpose of protecting its 19 rights under the Copyright Act, 17 U.S.C. § 101 et seq, and may not be disclosed to 20 anyone other than the parties in this action and their counsel of record pending further 23 4/9 Date: _____________, 2013 NO 25 ph C. S pero H 26 27 FO LI RT se Judge Jo __________________________ Honorable Judge of the ER C N D I S T District United StatesR I C T O F Court, Northern District of California A 24 RT U O IT IS SO ORDERED. ISTRIC ES D TC AT T R NIA order of this Court. S 22 UNIT ED 21 28 _____________________________________________________________________________ Amended [Proposed] Order 3 DHILLON & SMITH LLP

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?