Patrick Collins v. John Does 1-13 (Busty Construction Girls) – Judge Questions Subpoena Practice, Requires New Procedures

Magistrate Judge Dinsmore has weighed in on the subpoena practice in this type of download case and has set out new procedural requirements, including the requirements that Plaintiff turn over all correspondence with defendants to the court and also name Defendants within 7 days of learning their information via discovery. Plaintiff’s counsel has responded in a Motion to Reconsider.

“The Court has become aware of several court opinions from across the country that have raised concerns regarding potentially inappropriate procedures being utilized by plaintiffs in cases similar to the instant case to extract settlements from putative defendants without any intention by the Plaintiff of ever actually litigating the case on its merits. While the Court does not assume that Plaintiff or its counsel have engaged in any improper conduct, the Court will impose the following procedures in this matter to ensure the prompt identification and service of the putative Defendants in this matter (see Order) c/m. Signed by Magistrate Judge Mark J. Dinsmore on 9/19/2012.”

Scheduling Order:

Motion to Reconsider and Amend Court’s Order:

Patrick Collins v. John Does 1-13 (Busty Construction Girls) – Third Motion to Quash Filed

A third Motion to Quash has been filed in the “Busty Construction Girls” BitTorrent lawsuit. Additionally, Judge Tanya Walton Pratt has stricken the first Motion to Quash for containing numerous filing errors. That Doe did not refile by the 9/18 refile deadline and has been identified in the case documents.

Motion to Quash or Modify Subpoena:

Patrick Collins v. John Does 1-13 (Busty Construction Girls) – Second Motion to Quash Filed

A second Motion to Quash has been filed in the “Busty Construction Girls” BitTorrent lawsuit. Additionally, Judge Tanya Walton Pratt has stricken the first Motion to Quash for containing numerous filing errors. That Defendant has until 9/18/12 to refile.

Motion to Quash or Modify Subpoena:

Exhibit A:

Patrick Collins v. John Does 1-13 (Busty Construction Girls) – Motion to Quash Filed

One of the John Doe defendants in this lawsuit has filed a Motion to Quash. See the Motion (and Proposed Order) below.

[Update 9/17/12: This Motion was stricken for containing numerous filing errors. See the Court’s Order below. Defendant has until 9/18/12 to refile.]

Patrick Collins, Inc. v. John Does 1-13
Court Case Number:    1:12-cv-00844-TWP-DKL

Motion to Dismiss or Sever for Misjoinder and Motion to Quash the Subpoena:

Proposed Order:

Order Striking Motion to Quash [update 9/17/12]:

Indiana Copyright Litigation Update – Patrick Collins v. John Does 1-13 (Busty Construction Girls)

Patrick Collins, Inc. v. John Does 1-13

Court Case Number:    1:12-cv-00844-TWP-MJD
File Date:    Monday, June 18, 2012
Plaintiff:     Patrick Collins, Inc.
Plaintiff Counsel:     Paul J. Nicoletti of Nicoletti & Associates, PLLC
Defendant:     John Does 1-13
Cause:    Copyright Infringement, Contributory Infringement
Court:    Southern District of Indiana
Judge:     Judge Tanya Walton Pratt
Referred To: Magistrate Judge Denise K. LaRue
Reassigned To: Magistrate Judge Mark J. Dinsmore [Updated 9/26/12]