Dallas Buyers Club, LLC v. Does 1 - 25, No. 3:2014cv00493 - Document 6 (W.D. Wis. 2014)

Court Description: ORDER granting 3 Motion for Leave To Serve Third Party Subpoenas. Signed by Magistrate Judge Stephen L. Crocker on 7/25/2014. (voc)

Download PDF
Dallas Buyers Club, LLC v. Does 1 - 25 Doc. 6 IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT WESTERN DISTRICT OF WISCONSIN Dallas Buyers Club, LLC, Plaintiff, v. Docs 1-25, Defendants. THIRD ) ) ) Case: No.3: 14-ev-00493-sle ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ORDER ON MOTION FOR LEAVE TO SERVE PARTY SUBPOENAS PRIOR TO A RULE 26<0 CONFERENCE THIS CAUSE came before the Court upon Plaintiffs Motion for Leave to Serve Third Party Subpoenas Prior to a Rule 26(f) Conference (the "Motion"), and the Court being duly advised in the premises docs hereby: FIND, ORDER I. AND ADJUDGE: Plaintiff established that "good cause" exists for it to serve third party subpoenas on the Internet Service Providers listed on Complaint Exhibit B (the "ISPs"). Sec UMG Recording, Inc. v. Doc, 2008 WL 4104214, *4 (N.D. Cal. 2008); and Arista Records LLC v. Docs 1-19,551 2. F. Supp. 2d 1,6-7 (D.D.C. 2008). Plaintiff may serve each of the ISPs with a Rulc 45 subpoena commanding each ISP to provide Plaintiff with the true name and addrcss of the Defendant to whom the ISP assigned an IP address as set forth on Complaint Exhibit B. Plaintiff shall attach to any such subpoena a copy of this Order. 3. Plaintiff may also serve a Rule 45 subpocna 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. Dockets.Justia.com 4. Each ofthc ISPs that qualify as a "cablc operator," as defined by 47 U.S.c. S 522(5), which statcs: the term "cablc opcrator" means any person or group of persons (A) who provides cable servicc ovcr a cable systcm and directly or through one or more affiliates owns a significant intcrcst in such cable system, or (E) who otherwisc controls or is responsible the management for, through any arrangement, and operation of such a eable system shall comply with 47 U.S.c. S 55 I(c)(2)(B), which states: A cable operator may disclose such [personal identifying] information if the disclosure is ... madc pursuant to a court ordcr authorizing such disclosure, if the subseriber is notified of such ordcr by the person to whom thc order is directed. by scnding a copy of this Order to the Defendant. 5. The subpoenaed ISPs shall not require Plaintiff to pay a fee in advance of providing thc subpoenaed information; nor shall the subpoena cd ISPs require Plaintiff to pay a fee for an IP addrcss that is not controlled by such ISP, or for duplicate IP addresscs that resolve to the samc individual, or for an IP address that does not provide thc name of a unique individual, or for the ISP's internal costs to notify its customers. If necessary, the Court shall resolve any disputcs between the ISPs and Plaintiff regarding the reasonableness information ofthc amount proposed to be charged by the ISP after the subpoenaed is provided to Plaintiff. 6. If any particular Doe Defendant has been voluntarily dismissed thcn any motion filed by said Defendant objecting to thc disclosure of his or her identifying information denicd as moot. Notwithstanding moving Defendant's is hereby the foregoing, the applicable ISP shall withhold the identifying information from Plaintiff unless and until Plaintiff obtains a subsequent court ordcr authorizing the disclosure. .• '. . 7. 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 Plaintiffs rights as set forth in its Complaint. . ..,_n~ DONE AND ORDERED this _'1 day of Jvrr By ,2014;( :JtflA~_ _ UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE f'Yt61:r~rr. •

Some case metadata and case summaries were written with the help of AI, which can produce inaccuracies. You should read the full case before relying on it for legal research purposes.

This site is protected by reCAPTCHA and the Google Privacy Policy and Terms of Service apply.