KILLER JOE NEVADA, LLC v. DOES 1-15, 2:13-cv-00848. (2013)
Court: District Court, S.D. Ohio
Number: infdco20130903c85
Visitors: 17
Filed: Aug. 30, 2013
Latest Update: Aug. 30, 2013
Summary: ORDER MARK R. ABEL, Magistrate Judge. Plaintiff Killer Joe Nevada, LLC's August 28, 2013 ex parte application for leave to take discovery prior to the Rule 26(f) conference (doc. 3) is GRANTED. It is ORDERED that Plaintiff Killer Joe Nevada LLC may serve limited, immediate discovery on the internet service providers ("ISPs") identified in Exhibit 1 to the Declaration of Darren M. Griffin and on any later-discovered unknown or intermediary ISPs to obtain the identity of each Doe Defendant or
Summary: ORDER MARK R. ABEL, Magistrate Judge. Plaintiff Killer Joe Nevada, LLC's August 28, 2013 ex parte application for leave to take discovery prior to the Rule 26(f) conference (doc. 3) is GRANTED. It is ORDERED that Plaintiff Killer Joe Nevada LLC may serve limited, immediate discovery on the internet service providers ("ISPs") identified in Exhibit 1 to the Declaration of Darren M. Griffin and on any later-discovered unknown or intermediary ISPs to obtain the identity of each Doe Defendant or ..
More
ORDER
MARK R. ABEL, Magistrate Judge.
Plaintiff Killer Joe Nevada, LLC's August 28, 2013 ex parte application for leave to take discovery prior to the Rule 26(f) conference (doc. 3) is GRANTED.
It is ORDERED that Plaintiff Killer Joe Nevada LLC may serve limited, immediate discovery on the internet service providers ("ISPs") identified in Exhibit 1 to the Declaration of Darren M. Griffin and on any later-discovered unknown or intermediary ISPs to obtain the identity of each Doe Defendant or other identified alleged infringers by serving a Rule 45 subpoena that seeks documents that identify each Doe defendant, including the name, addresses, telephone numbers, email addresses, and Media Access Control addresses for each alleged infringer. The disclosure of this information is ordered pursuant to 20 U.S.C. § 1232g(b)(2)(B) where applicable to educational institutions.
IT IS FURTHER ORDERED THAT any information that is disclosed to Plaintiff in response to the Rule 45 subpoenas may be used by Plaintiff solely for the purpose of protecting Plaintiff's rights under the Copyright Act.
Source: Leagle
