UN4 Productions, Inc. v. Does

Filing 7

ORDER granting 4 Motion for Expedited Discovery. Signed by Magistrate Judge David Keesler on 8/28/2017. (tmg)

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
FOR THE WESTERN DISTRICT OF NORTH CAROLINA
STATESVILLE DIVISION
CIVIL ACTION NO. 5:17-CV-155-RLV-DCK
UN4 PRODUCTIONS, INC.,
Plaintiff,
v.
DOES 1-10,
Defendants.

)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)

ORDER

THIS MATTER IS BEFORE THE COURT on Plaintiff’s “Motion For Leave To Take
Discovery Prior To Rule 26(f) Conference” (Document No. 4) filed August 25, 2017. This motion
has been referred to the undersigned Magistrate Judge pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 636(b), and
immediate review is appropriate. Having carefully considered the motion and the record, the
undersigned will grant the motion.
The “Complaint For Copyright Infringement” (Document No. 1) asserts that Doe
Defendants 1-10 (the “Doe Defendants”) have infringed on Plaintiff’s exclusive rights under the
Copyright Act by copying and distributing Plaintiff’s motion picture, Boyka: Undisputed 4
(“Boyka”), a mixed martial arts action film. (Document No. 1, p.8). Plaintiff further asserts that
Boyka is protected by the Copyright Act and Registration PA 2-031-176, March 29, 2017.
(Document No. 1, p.3). At this time, Plaintiff does not know the true names of the Doe Defendants,
only their Internet Protocol (“IP”) addresses as assigned by their Internet Service Provider (“ISP”).
(Document No. 1, pp.4, 13).
By the instant motion, Plaintiff seeks to issue subpoenas pursuant to Fed.R.Civ.P. 45 to
one or more ISPs who provided Internet services to any of the Doe Defendants identified by an IP

address in Exhibit 2 of the Complaint. (Document No. 4, p.1); see also, (Document No. 1, p.13).
Plaintiff asserts that it will seek production of documents containing information sufficient to
identify each Doe Defendant, including their names and current addresses. Id. Once it obtains the
true names of the Doe Defendants, Plaintiff intends to amend its Complaint. (Document No. 1,
p.4).
Based on the foregoing, the undersigned finds good cause to grant the pending motion and
allow Plaintiff to seek the identities of the Doe Defendants; however, the undersigned expresses
no opinion as to how the Court might rule on any motion(s) to quash the proposed subpoenas.
IT IS, THEREFORE, ORDERED that Plaintiff’s “Motion For Leave To Take Discovery
Prior To Rule 26(f) Conference” (Document No. 4) is GRANTED.
IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that: (1) Plaintiff may serve each of the ISPs with a copy
of this Order and 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 IP address as set forth in
Exhibit B (Document No. 1, p.13) to the Complaint; and (2) Plaintiff may only use the information
disclosed in response to a Rule 45 subpoena served on an ISP for the purpose of protecting and
enforcing Plaintiff’s rights as set forth in its Complaint.
SO ORDERED.

Signed: August 28, 2017

2