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)

Download PDF
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 “ 22” (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?