ME2 Productions, Inc. v. Does 1-5
ORDER granting 5 Motion for Leave Discovery Prior to Rule 26(f) Conference. Counsel is directed to read the order in its entirety for critical information. Signed by United States Magistrate Judge Robert T. Numbers, II on 3/22/2017. (Briggeman, N.)
IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF NORTH CAROLINA
ME2 Productions, Inc.,
This cause came before the Court upon Plaintiff’s Motion for Leave to Take Discovery
Prior to Rule 26(f) Conference (the “Motion”). D.E. 5. The Court, having reviewed the Motion
and the Memorandum of Law in Support of the Motion, believes that good cause has been shown
to grant the motion. Therefore is it ordered that:
Plaintiff’s Motion is ALLOWED on the terms set forth below.
As to each Defendant, Plaintiff may serve each of the ISPs with a Rule 45
subpoena commanding each ISP to provide Plaintiff with the true name, permanent address,
current address, telephone number, email address, and Media Access Control (“MAC”) address
of the Defendant to whom the ISP assigned an Internet Protocol (“IP”) address as set forth in
Exhibit B to the Complaint. Each ISP is ordered to provide the documents sought in each
subpoena in accordance with the terms of this Order. Plaintiff shall attach to any such subpoena a
copy of this Order.
Plaintiff may also serve a Rule 45 subpoena in the same manner as above on any
service provider that is identified in response to a subpoena as a provider of internet services to
one of the Defendants.
Each of the ISPs qualify as a “cable operator,” as defined by 47 U.S.C. § 522(5)
by sending a copy of this Order to the Defendant.
The subpoenaed ISPs shall not require Plaintiff to pay a fee in advance of
providing the subpoenas information; nor shall the subpoenaed ISPs require Plaintiff to pay a fee
for an IP address that is not controlled by such ISP, or for duplicate IP addresses that resolved to
the same individual, or for an address that does not provide the name of a unique individual, or
for the ISPs’ internal costs to notify their customers. If necessary, the Court shall resolved any
disputes between the ISPs and Plaintiff regarding the reasonableness of the amount proposed to
be charged by the ISPs after the subpoenaed information is provided to Plaintiff.
Within seven days after the date of Plaintiff’s service on the ISPs of a subpoena
authorized herein, each ISP shall serve written notice of the subpoena on the Defendant about
whom documents are sought in the subpoena. If an ISP or a Defendant about whom documents
are sought in a subpoena wishes to have the subpoena quashed or modified, such person
(whether it be an ISP or a Defendant) must file with the court and serve on counsel for Plaintiff a
motion to quash or modify the subpoena prior to the return date for the subpoena (which is the
date specified in the subpoena for production of the documents sought). The return date shall be
no earlier than 28 days after the date of service by Plaintiff of the subpoena on the ISPs.
An ISP shall not produce any documents in response to a subpoena prior to the
return date or, if any motions to quash or modify are filed with respect to the subpoena, unless
and until an order is entered denying any such motions and permitting production pursuant to the
subpoena (in which case production shall be in accordance with the terms of such order).
Plaintiff shall notify the ISPs of the filing of any motion to quash or modify a subpoena within
one day after the filing of the motion. An ISP shall make appropriate arrangements to ensure that
it has notice of any motions to quash or modify a subpoena before it produces any documents in
response to the subpoena.
Any documents produced to Plaintiff in response to a subpoena, including the
information contained therein, may be used by Plaintiff solely for the purpose of prosecuting its
infringement claims in this action.
Except as expressly provided herein, by further order of the court, or in the
Federal Rules of Civil Procedure, Plaintiff may not engage in discovery in this action prior to
conducting a Rule 26(f) conference.
Dated: March , 2017.
Dated: March 22, 2017
Robert ROBERT T. NUMBERS, II
T. Numbers, II
United UNITED STATES MJudge
States Magistrate AGISTRATE JUDGE
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?