Malibu Media, LLC v. JOHN DOE subscriber assigned IP address 50.174.232.154

Filing 12

ORDER DENYING REQUEST TO EXTEND DEADLINE TO SERVE DEFENDANT by Hon. William Alsup denying 11 Motion for Extension of Time to File.(whalc1, COURT STAFF) (Filed on 6/20/2016)

1
2
3
4
5
6

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

7
FOR THE NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA
8
9
MALIBU MEDIA, LLC,

11
For the Northern District of California

United States District Court

10

12
13
14
15

No. C 16-00996 WHA

Plaintiff,
v.
JOHN DOE SUBSCRIBER ASSIGNED IP
ADDRESS 50.174.232.154,

ORDER DENYING REQUEST
TO EXTEND DEADLINE
TO SERVE DEFENDANT

Defendant.
/

16
17

On March 23, an order granted Malibu Media leave to serve a third party subpoena on

18

defendant’s Internet provider in order to obtain defendant’s identifying information. Malibu

19

Media served the subpoena on March 28 and received the response on May 17. A prior order

20

prospectively extended the deadline for Malibu Media to serve defendant to thirty-five days

21

following receipt of defendant’s identifying information, resulting in a deadline of June 20.

22

After receiving defendant’s identifying information on May 17, Malibu Media

23

conducted an investigation and on May 23 moved to file its amended complaint and proposed

24

summons under seal pursuant to the protective order in this case. The summons issued on May

25

24, and Malibu Media instructed its process server to begin attempting service.

26

In their brief, counsel for Malibu Media state that the process server attempted service at

27

defendant’s home (which is behind a locked gate) on June 7, June 9, and June 15. Malibu

28

Media fails to provide a sworn record of the service attempts. It provides no explanation for the
two-week delay between the issuance of the summons and the first service attempt or for the

1

six-day delay between the second and third service attempts. Further, Malibu Media fails to

2

explain why the process server made no attempt to serve defendant at any other location besides

3

his home.

4

Malibu Media has not been diligent in attempting service. Its motion to extend the

5

deadline to effect service is DENIED. If service is not timely made today, the case will be

6

dismissed for lack of prosecution.

7
8

IT IS SO ORDERED.

9
Dated: June 20, 2016.

WILLIAM ALSUP
UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE

11
For the Northern District of California

United States District Court

10

12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
2