Elawyers Elawyers
Washington| Change

PRIME WIRE & CABLE, INC. v. JOHN, 5:15-CV-145-RLV-DCK. (2015)

Court: District Court, W.D. North Carolina Number: infdco20151230898 Visitors: 1
Filed: Dec. 29, 2015
Latest Update: Dec. 29, 2015
Summary: ORDER DAVID C. KEESLER , Magistrate Judge . THIS MATTER IS BEFORE THE COURT on "Plaintiff's Motion For Additional Expedited Discovery" (Document No. 5). 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. Prime Wire & Cable, Inc. ("Plaintiff") initiated this action with the filing of a "Complaint" (Document No.
More

ORDER

THIS MATTER IS BEFORE THE COURT on "Plaintiff's Motion For Additional Expedited Discovery" (Document No. 5). 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.

Prime Wire & Cable, Inc. ("Plaintiff") initiated this action with the filing of a "Complaint" (Document No. 1) on December 14, 2015. The Complaint asserts claims for: (1) Misappropriation Of Trade Secrets (N.C.G.S. § 666-152 et seq.); (2) Computer Trespass (N.C.G.S. § 14-458); and (3) Unfair and Deceptive Trade Practices (N.C.G.S. § 75-1.1 et seq.). (Document No. 1). The crux of Plaintiff's allegations is that John and/or Jane Does 1-10 ("Defendants") misappropriated Plaintiff's confidential and trade secret information by accessing the company's computer network without authorization. (Document No. 1, pp.3-4).

"Plaintiff's Motion For Limited Expedited Discovery" (Document No. 3) was filed December 21, 2015, seeking permission to serve subpoenas to specifically identify Defendants so that this lawsuit may proceed. (Document No. 3, p.1). The Court allowed that motion, with modification, on December 22, 2015. (Document No. 4). Specifically, the undersigned allowed "Plaintiff to serve a Rule 45 subpoena on Pastebin.com in an attempt to identify the person or persons who allegedly posted Plaintiff's confidential and trade secret information on that website on July 5 and/or 29, 2015." (Document No. 4, p.2).

"Plaintiff's Motion For Additional Expedited Discovery" (Document No. 5) was filed on December 29, 2015. By the instant motion, Plaintiff reports that it successfully served a subpoena on Pastebin.com, but that the information Pastebin.com could provide does not allow Plaintiff to identify the person or persons who allegedly posted Plaintiff's confidential and trade secret information to that website. (Document No. 5, p.2). Plaintiff now seeks leave to subpoena Time Warner Cable to identify one of the IP addresses provided by Pastebin.com. Id.

Based on Plaintiff's arguments in the instant motion, and the Court's previous review of this matter, the undersigned finds good cause to allow additional limited discovery. See (Document No. 4).

If Time Warner Cable is served with a subpoena related to this matter, Plaintiff shall also provide a copy of this Order. Id. Any information disclosed to Plaintiff in response to a Rule 45 subpoena may be used by Plaintiff solely for the purpose of protecting Plaintiff's rights as set forth in the Complaint. Time Warner Cable shall preserve any subpoenaed information pending the resolution of any timely filed motion to quash.

IT IS, THEREFORE, ORDERED that "Plaintiff's Motion For Additional Expedited Discovery" (Document No. 5) is GRANTED.

IT IS FURTHER ORDERED Plaintiff shall file a Status Report on or before February 5, 2016.

Source:  Leagle

Can't find what you're looking for?

Post a free question on our public forum.
Ask a Question
Search for lawyers by practice areas.
Find a Lawyer