Scribd
Upload
124 views2 pages

United States District Court: Middle District OF Florida

The court granted Malibu Media a final 30 day extension to serve the Doe defendants in its copyright infringement lawsuit. This was because Malibu Media experienced delays in receiving identification information for the Doe defendants from their internet service providers. The court also denied a motion by Doe defendant 17 to dismiss the claims and sever the case, finding the issues premature until defendants have been properly served. The court agreed with another judge's similar ruling that severance based on improper joinder cannot be determined until defendants have been named and served.

Uploaded by

copyrightclerk
Copyright
© Attribution Non-Commercial (BY-NC)
We take content rights seriously. If you suspect this is your content, claim it here.
Available Formats
Download as PDF, TXT or read online on Scribd
124 views2 pages

United States District Court: Middle District OF Florida

The court granted Malibu Media a final 30 day extension to serve the Doe defendants in its copyright infringement lawsuit. This was because Malibu Media experienced delays in receiving identification information for the Doe defendants from their internet service providers. The court also denied a motion by Doe defendant 17 to dismiss the claims and sever the case, finding the issues premature until defendants have been properly served. The court agreed with another judge's similar ruling that severance based on improper joinder cannot be determined until defendants have been named and served.

Uploaded by

copyrightclerk
Copyright
© Attribution Non-Commercial (BY-NC)
We take content rights seriously. If you suspect this is your content, claim it here.
Available Formats
Download as PDF, TXT or read online on Scribd
You are on page 1/ 2

Case 8:12-cv-01666-JSM-EAJ Document 33 Filed 03/13/13 Page 1 of 2 PageID 252

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT


MIDDLE DISTRICT OF FLORIDA
TAMPA DIVISION

MALIBU MEDIA, LLC, Plaintiff, v. JOHN DOES 1-19, Defendants. _____________________________________/ Case No. 8:12-cv-1666-T-30EAJ

ORDER
THIS CAUSE comes before the Court upon Plaintiffs Third Motion for Extension of Time to Serve Defendants (Dkt. 28) and Defendant John Doe 17's Motion to Dismiss, Quash, and Sever (Dkt. 27). The Court, having reviewed the motions, John Doe 4's memorandum in opposition, and being otherwise advised in the premises, concludes that Plaintiff shall have a final extension of thirty days to serve the John Doe Defendants and Defendant John Doe 17's motion is therefore moot. Plaintiff seeks additional time to serve the John Doe Defendants because there was a delay in receiving the Doe Defendants identification from their respective internet service providers (ISPs). The Court previously provided Plaintiff with extensions of time to effect service for this same reason. Thus, the Court will grant Plaintiff a final extension of thirty days to serve the Doe Defendants. Notably, as of this date, all of the ISPs have responded to Plaintiffs third-party subpoenas.

Case 8:12-cv-01666-JSM-EAJ Document 33 Filed 03/13/13 Page 2 of 2 PageID 253

On a related note, Doe 17 moves to dismiss and quash because Plaintiff has failed to serve Doe 17 within the time allotted in Fed. R. Civ. P. 4(m), i.e, 120 days. This motion is now moot given the thirty-day extension of the period of time to serve the Doe Defendants. Doe 17 also moves to sever the claims against Doe 17 because the Doe Defendants are improperly joined. The Court denies this request as premature. As Judge Merryday aptly noted in a nearly identical case, (Malibu Media, LLC v. John Does 1-9, Case No. 8:12-cv669-T-23AEP; Dkt. 25), the issue of whether the Doe Defendants should be severed is premature because the Doe Defendants have not yet been served with process. If Plaintiff names any of the Doe Defendants as Defendants in this action, the issues of severance and dismissal based on improper joinder may be raised at that time. It is therefore ORDERED AND ADJUDGED that: 1. Plaintiffs Third Motion for Extension of Time to Serve Defendants (Dkt. 28)

is GRANTED. Plaintiff has an extension of thirty (30) days from the date of this Order to serve the Doe Defendants. This is Plaintiffs final extension. If Plaintiff does not serve the Defendants within this period of time, the Court will dismiss this action without further notice. 2. Defendant John Doe 17's Motion to Dismiss, Quash, and Sever (Dkt. 27) is

DENIED for the reasons stated herein. DONE and ORDERED in Tampa, Florida on March 13, 2013.

Copies furnished to: Counsel/Parties of Record


S:\Even\2012\12-cv-1666.mts27&28.frm

Page 2 of 2

You might also like