Good Man Productions, Inc. v. John Doe subscriber assigned IP address 98.245.8.8

Filing 20

ORDER denying 18 Motion to Quash by Magistrate Judge Michael E. Hegarty on 1/8/2015.(mdave)

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
FOR THE DISTRICT OF COLORADO
Civil Action No. 14-cv-03224-WYD-MEH
GOOD MAN PRODUCTIONS, INC.,
Plaintiff,
v.
JOHN DOE SUBSCRIBER ASSIGNED IP ADDRESS 98.245.8.8,
Defendant.

MINUTE ORDER
Entered by Michael E. Hegarty, United States Magistrate Judge, on January 8, 2015.
Defendant Motion’s to Quash or Vacate Subpoena [filed January 7, 2015; docket #17] is
denied for the following reasons.
First, on December 29, 2014, this Court instructed the Defendant to file a motion to proceed
anonymously contemporaneously with a motion to quash; however, he has failed to do so here. See
K-Beech, Inc. v. Does 1-29, 826 F. Supp. 2d 903, 905 (W.D.N.C. 2011) (noting that a party who
wishes to proceed anonymously may overcome the presumption against anonymous proceedings by
filing a well-reasoned motion to proceed anonymously); see also West Coast Prods., Inc. v. Does
1-5829, 275 F.R.D. 9, 12 (D.D.C. 2011) (“federal courts generally allow parties to proceed
anonymously only under certain special circumstances when anonymity is necessary to protect a
person from harassment, injury, ridicule or personal embarrassment”). Although Defendant asserts
“I respectfully request that I be allowed to [file the present motion] without revealing my personally
identifying information,” such unsupported statement fails to comply with D.C. Colo. LCivR 7.1C
(“a motion ... shall be supported by a recitation of legal authority incorporated into the motion”) and
the law cited herein.
Second, Defendant’s entire argument is based upon an “improper joinder” of defendants.
However, the Plaintiff names only one Defendant in this action; therefore, there can be no improper
joinder in this case.
Finally, the Court finds no basis upon which to restrict the present motion, as it contains no
personal or confidential identifying information; accordingly, the Clerk of the Court is directed to
remove the motion from restriction.
The Clerk of the Court is directed to mail a copy of this order to the Defendant at the address
found in docket #11 and to maintain the document in docket #11 under Restriction Level 2 until

further order of the Court.

2