Craigslist, Inc. v. Papp
Filing
15
Order by Magistrate Judge Donna M. Ryu regarding 14 Plaintiff's Proposed Discovery Plan.(dmrlc1, COURT STAFF) (Filed on 2/5/2013)
1
2
3
4
5
6
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
7
NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA
8
9
CRAIGSLIST INC,
11
For the Northern District of California
United States District Court
10
Plaintiff,
No. C 12-05276 DMR
ORDER REGARDING PLAINTIFF’S
PROPOSED DISCOVERY PLAN
v.
12
MICHAEL JAMES PAPP,
13
Defendant.
___________________________________/
14
15
16
On December 14, 2012, the Clerk of the Court entered default as to Defendant Michael
17
James Papp. [Docket No. 9.] On December 19, 2012, Plaintiff craigslist Inc. (“craigslist”) filed an
18
administrative motion for leave to conduct damages discovery as to Defendant Papp. [Docket No.
19
10.] On January 3, 2013, the court issued an order finding that Plaintiff had shown good cause to
20
serve third party discovery regarding damages.1 The court ordered Plaintiff to submit a proposed
21
discovery plan for the court’s review and approval, which Plaintiff submitted on January 16, 2013.
22
[Docket Nos. 11, 14.]
23
24
In its proposed discovery plan, Plaintiff requests permission to serve subpoenas for
documents and information on Defendant’s six known payment processors, and submitted the
25
26
27
28
1
Upon entry of default, the factual allegations within the complaint are accepted as true, except
those relating to the amount of damages; it is the burden of the plaintiff to prove up its damages.
TeleVideo Sys., Inc. v. Heidenthal, 826 F.2d 915, 917-18 (9th Cir. 1987); see also Bd. of Tr. of the
Boilermaker Vacation Trust v. Skelly, Inc., No. 04–02841 CW, 2005 WL 433462, at *2 (N.D. Cal. Feb.
24, 2005) (noting that “[p]laintiff has the burden of proving damages through testimony or written
affidavit”).
1
subpoenas it seeks permission to serve. (See Decl. of Hennessy in Supp. of Pl.’s Proposed Disc.
2
Plan, Jan. 16, 2013, Exs. B, C.) Plaintiff asserts that discovery from the payment processors “should
3
also reveal the bank accounts that the defendant used to facilitate his illicit transactions, as well as
4
provide additional evidence of the revenue generated.” (Pl.’s Proposed Disc. Plan 1.) Therefore,
5
Plaintiff also requests permission to serve subpoenas on those banks once the payment processor
6
information reveals the defendant’s banks. Plaintiff did not submit the bank subpoenas it seeks
7
permission to serve. Plaintiff requests that it be allowed six months to conduct its discovery on both
8
the payment processors and the banks. (Pl.’s Proposed Disc. Plan 2.)
9
The court has reviewed the proposed subpoenas Plaintiff seeks to serve on the payment
processors and finds that the subpoenas are overbroad and seek information that Plaintiff has not
11
For the Northern District of California
United States District Court
10
shown is relevant to its claims against Defendant. First, Plaintiff seeks documents regarding
12
“Responsive Accounts,” which it defines as “accounts associated with the following persons,
13
entities, email addresses, products, and/or identifying information,” followed by a list of two
14
individuals and various email addresses, websites and telephone numbers. (Decl. of Hennessy Exs.
15
B, C.) However, one of the individuals listed, Shelly Papp, is not a named defendant, and Plaintiff
16
has made no showing that documents and information regarding Shelly Papp are relevant to this
17
action. In addition, the second category of documents Plaintiff requests seeks “documents sufficient
18
to show identifying and address information for each purchaser/customer/subscriber (including
19
name, mailing address, and email address)” for each “Responsive account.” (Decl. of Hennessy
20
Exs. B, C.) However, in its complaint, Plaintiff only asserts claims against Defendant Papp, as the
21
developer and distributor of the “Ad-Nuke for Craigslist” software on the website “www.ad-
22
nuke.com.” (See Compl. ¶¶ 10, 41.) Plaintiff has not asserted any claims against the users and/or
23
purchasers of Defendant’s product (see Compl. ¶¶ 68; 75-77; 83-85; 90), and has made no showing
24
of the relevance of the identifying and contact information for users and/or purchasers.
25
Therefore, Plaintiff is granted leave to serve its proposed subpoenas on the payment
26
processors, amended as follows: Plaintiff’s proposed subpoenas may not request documents or
27
information related to accounts associated with Shelly Papp, and may not request documents
28
responsive to proposed category 2, “documents sufficient to show identifying and address
2
1
information for each purchaser/customer/subscriber” for each responsive account. Plaintiff is not
2
granted leave to serve subpoenas on Defendant’s banks at this time. Instead, Plaintiff is ordered to
3
submit a status report regarding the discovery on Defendant’s payment processors by no later than
4
May 6, 2013, along with a proposed discovery plan regarding Defendant’s banks and the form of
5
any subpoenas Plaintiff proposes to serve thereon.
8
9
Dated: February 5, 2013
ERED
ORD
T IS SO
I
. Ryu
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
3
A
LI
ER
H
For the Northern District of California
United States Magistrate Judge
RT
United States District Court
11
onna M
Judge
DONNA M. RYUD
NO
10
R NIA
IT IS SO ORDERED.
FO
S
UNIT
ED
7
RT
U
O
6
S DISTRICT
TE
C
TA
N
F
D IS T IC T O
R
C
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?