Boy Racer, Inc v. Does 2-71

Filing 26

ORDER GRANTING 24 Notice of Voluntary Dismissal filed by Boy Racer, Inc. Doe Defendant associated with the following Internet Protocol (IP) address: 98.255.135.206 is TERMINATED. Signed by Judge Edward J. Davila on 11/23/2011. (ecg, COURT STAFF) (Filed on 11/23/2011)

Download PDF
S ER R NIA FO a A N 6 D IS T IC T R IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE 7 J . D av i l LI Attorney for Plaintiff d w a rd J u d ge E H 5 RT 4 D RDERE IS SO O IT NO 3 UNIT ED 2 Brett L. Gibbs, Esq. (SBN 251000) Prenda Law Inc. 38 Miller Avenue, #263 Mill Valley, CA 94941 415-325-5900 blgibbs@wefightpiracy.com RT U O 1 S DISTRICT TE C TA 8 C 11/23/2011 NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA 9 OF SAN JOSE DIVISION 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 BOY RACER, INC., ) ) Plaintiff, ) v. ) ) DOES 2-72, ) ) Defendants. ) ) ____________________________________) 17 No. C-11-02833 EJD NOTICE OF VOLUNTARY DISMISSAL OF ACTION WITHOUT PREJUDICE ONLY AS TO ONE ANONYMOUS DOE DEFENDANT NOTICE OF VOLUNTARY DISMISSAL OF ACTION WITHOUT PREJUDICE ONLY AS TO ONE ANONYMOUS DOE DEFENDANT 18 19 NOTICE IS HEREBY GIVEN that, pursuant to Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 41(a)(1), 20 21 Plaintiff voluntary dismisses all claims without prejudice brought in this action against a single 22 anonymous Doe Defendant associated with the following Internet Protocol (“IP”) address: 23 98.255.135.206. As noted on Exhibit A to Plaintiff’s original Complaint (see 5:cv-11-01958, ECF 24 No. 1), this IP address was issued by Comcast Cable Communications, and Doe Defendant was 25 26 27 28 personally observed by Plaintiff’s agents using this IP address in the particular swarm identified in this case unlawfully infringing Plaintiff’s copyrighted works in March of 2011.1 Further, from other 1 This of course, is not the only times this Doe Defendant was in the swarm, but rather the only times personally observed and his or her available information captured by Plaintiff’s agents’ proprietary technology. 1 information gained through Plaintiff’s agents’ proprietary technology and general research, this Doe 2 Defendant appears to have not only infringed upon Plaintiff’s copyrighted works in this case, but 3 4 5 6 also used the same IP address to infringe upon other works produced by Plaintiff. Plaintiff hereby chooses to dismisses Doe Defendant associated with IP addresses 98.255.135.206 without prejudice to pursue that individual in a separate consolidated lawsuit. 7 In accordance with Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 41(a)(1), the Doe Defendant has neither 8 filed an answer to Plaintiff’s Complaint, nor a motion for summary judgment. Dismissal under 9 Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 41(a)(1) is therefore appropriate. 10 11 Plaintiff still maintains its claims against the other active anonymous Doe Defendant(s) remaining in this action, and reserves the right to name such individuals and/or serve them when in 12 13 14 possession of their identifying information in this case. Respectfully Submitted, 15 16 17 18 PRENDA LAW INC., DATED: November 20, 2011 By: ____/s/ Brett L. Gibbs, Esq._______ 19 Brett L. Gibbs, Esq. (SBN 251000) Prenda Law Inc. 38 Miller Avenue, #263 Mill Valley, CA 94941 blgibbs@wefightpiracy.com Attorney for Plaintiff 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 2 NOTICE OF VOLUNTARY DISMISSAL OF ONE DOE DEFENDANT WITHOUT PREJUDICE No. C-11-02833 EJD 1 2 3 4 CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE The undersigned hereby certifies that on November 20, 2011, all individuals of record who are deemed to have consented to electronic service are being served a true and correct copy of the foregoing document, and all attachments and related documents, using the Court’s ECF system, in compliance with Local Rule 5-6 and General Order 45. 5 6 /s/_Brett L. Gibbs______ Brett L. Gibbs, Esq. 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 3 NOTICE OF VOLUNTARY DISMISSAL OF ONE DOE DEFENDANT WITHOUT PREJUDICE No. C-11-02833 EJD

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?