Venice PI, LLC v. Does 1-17

Filing 20

MINUTE ORDER granting Plaintiff's 18 Motion for Extension of Time to Serve Complaint; The deadline for plaintiff to effect service is EXTENDED from October 12, 2017, to October 30, 2017. Authorized by Judge Thomas S. Zilly. (SWT)

1
2
3
4
5

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
WESTERN DISTRICT OF WASHINGTON
AT SEATTLE

6
7
VENICE PI, LLC,
8
9

Plaintiff,

C17-1074 TSZ

v.
INA SICOTORSCHI, et al.,

10
11

Defendants.
VENICE PI, LLC,
Plaintiff,

12
13

v.
GREGORY SCOTT, et al.,

14
15

Defendants.
VENICE PI, LLC,
Plaintiff,

16
v.
17

20

C17-1076 TSZ
MINUTE ORDER

YELENA TKACHENKO, et al.,
Defendants.

18
19

C17-1075 TSZ

The following Minute Order is made by direction of the Court, the Honorable
Thomas S. Zilly, United States District Judge:

(1)
Plaintiff’s motions for extension of time to serve, docket no. 18 in
21 C17-1074, docket no. 12 in C17-1075, and docket no. 14 in C17-1076, are GRANTED as
follows. The deadline for plaintiff to effect service is EXTENDED from October 12,
22
23
MINUTE ORDER - 1

1 2017, to October 30, 2017, which is three weeks after waivers of service are due.1 No
further extension will be granted.
2
(2)
The Clerk is directed to send a copy of this Minute Order to all counsel of
3 record.
Dated this 5th day of October, 2017.

4
5

William M. McCool
Clerk

6

s/Karen Dews
Deputy Clerk

7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14

Plaintiff’s counsel persistently delays efforts to effect service so that he can send a round of letters to
unrepresented defendants. Plaintiff’s counsel contends that such letters are intended to protect the privacy
16 of defendants, allowing them to “name names,” i.e., others who might be responsible for the alleged
copyright infringement, and/or to settle the dispute before being identified in an amended pleading. The
letters, however, are dispatched only a week before an amended complaint is filed, and the extent to
17 which they serve such purpose is therefore limited. The letters appear to instead be aimed at frightening
individuals into paying money to avoid being dragged into litigation, stating as follows:

15

18
19

1

This is a time sensitive matter. In similar cases the Court has required us to promptly
move the case forward by amendment to name individual defendants . . . , and our client
intends to do so barring changed circumstances.
Ex. D to Lowe Decl. (docket no. 19 in C17-1074). The Court will no longer countenance plaintiff’s

20 counsel’s tactics, and will not in the future grant extensions of the time to effect service so that plaintiff’s
counsel can distribute such letters. In addition, in any similar letters mailed to unrepresented parties from
21 this date forward, plaintiff’s counsel shall not reference the Court or in any way indicate or imply that any
action already or to be taken by plaintiff or its attorney in this litigation is required by the Court. This
directive extends to all related cases pending before the Honorable Thomas S. Zilly, regardless of which
22 plaintiff is prosecuting the matter.

23
MINUTE ORDER - 2