Fathers & Daughters Nevada, LLC v. Doe 1 et al
Filing
12
ORDER granting 10 Motion for Leave to Take Limited Expedited Discovery by Magistrate Judge Craig B. Shaffer on 3/24/16.(cbssec)
THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
FOR THE DISTRICT OF COLORADO
Civil Action No. 16-cv-00670-WJM-CBS
FATHERS & DAUGHTERS NEVADA, LLC,
a Nevada Limited Liability Company,
Plaintiff,
v.
JOHN DOES 1-20,
Defendants.
ORDER
Craig B. Shaffer, United States Magistrate Judge.
Before the Court is Plaintiff’s Motion for Leave to Take Limited Expedited Discovery of
Information Prior to Rule 26(f) Conference [filed March 24, 2016; docket #10]. Plaintiff’s
motion is granted as follows.
Plaintiff’s motion alleges that the Doe Defendants, identified only by their Internet
Protocol (“IP”) addresses, have infringed on Plaintiff’s copyrighted work by using the internet
and a “BitTorrent” protocol to reproduce, distribute, display, or perform Plaintiff’s protected
film. Plaintiff requests permission from the Court to serve limited, immediate discovery on the
Doe Defendants’ Internet Service Providers (“ISPs”) prior to the Rule 26(f) conference. The
purpose of this discovery is to obtain additional information concerning the identities of the Doe
Defendants.
Fed. R. Civ. P. 26(d) proscribes seeking discovery (except under Rule 34, which is not
applicable here) before the Rule 26(f) conference. However, this prohibition is not absolute; the
Court may authorize discovery upon a showing of good cause. Pod-Ners,LLC v. Northern Feed
& Bean of Lucerne Ltd. Liability Co., 204 F.R.D. 675, 676 (D. Colo. 2002). “Expedited
discovery should be limited, however, and narrowly tailored to seek information necessary to
support expedited or preliminary relief.” Avaya, Inc. v. Acumen Telecom Corp., No. 10-cv03075-CMA-BNB, 2011 WL 9293, at *2 (D. Colo. Jan. 3, 2011) (citation omitted).
After review of the motion, the Court finds that Plaintiff establishes good cause for
limited expedited discovery. Therefore, Plaintiff’s motion is granted as follows. The Plaintiff
may serve third party subpoenas pursuant to Fed. R. Civ. P. 45 on the identified ISPs with the
limited purpose of ascertaining the identities of the Doe Defendants as identified by the twenty
(20) IP addresses listed in Docket #1-1. The subpoenas shall be limited to providing Plaintiff
with the name, service address, billing address, telephone number, email address, and Media
Access Control address of the Defendant to whom the ISP has assigned an IP address. With each
subpoena, Plaintiff shall also serve a copy of this Order. The ISP shall notify the subscriber that
his/her identity has been subpoenaed by the Plaintiff. Finally, the Court emphasizes that Plaintiff
may only use the information disclosed in response to the subpoenas for the purpose of
protecting and enforcing its rights as set forth in its Complaint [docket #1]. The Court cautions
Plaintiff that improper use of this information may result in sanctions.
2
Entered and dated in Denver, Colorado this 24th day of March, 2016.
BY THE COURT:
s/Craig B. Shaffer
United States Magistrate Judge
3
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?