Nordic Naturals, Inc. v. John Does 1-50

N.D. California

Nordic Naturals, Inc. v. John Does 1-50

DecidedJuly 13, 2023

Docket4:23-cv-02606

StatusUnknown

This text of Nordic Naturals, Inc. v. John Does 1-50 (Nordic Naturals, Inc. v. John Does 1-50) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering District Court, N.D. California primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook

Nordic Naturals, Inc. v. John Does 1-50, (N.D. Cal. 2023).

Pincite

Opinion

1 2 3 4 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 5 NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA 6 7 NORDIC NATURALS, INC., Case No. 23-cv-02606-DMR

8 Plaintiff, ORDER DENYING MOTION FOR 9 v. LEAVE TO SERVE A SUBPOENA WITHOUT PREJUDICE 10 JOHN DOES 1-50, INDIVIDUALLY OR AS CORPORATE/BUSINESS ENTITIES, Re: Dkt. No. 6 11 Defendant. 12 13 The court has reviewed Plaintiff Nordic Naturals, Inc.’s ex parte motion for leave to serve 14 a third-party subpoena prior to the Rule 26(f) conference. [Docket No. 6.] Civil Local Rule 7-5 15 provides that “[f]actual contentions made in support of . . . any motion must be supported by an 16 affidavit or declaration and by appropriate references to the record.” Civ. L.R. 7-5(a). While 17 Plaintiff submitted a declaration attaching a copy of its proposed subpoena (Docket No. 6-2), it did 18 not submit any evidence supporting the factual contentions in its motion. For example, Plaintiff 19 contends that it took “previous steps . . . to locate the Defendants,” including “investigating” their 20 “names and identities,” but did not provide evidence of any such investigation. See Mot. 3. See 21 Columbia Ins. Co. v. seescandy.com, 185 F.R.D. 573, 578-80 (N.D. Cal. 1999) (describing the 22 factors courts examine to determine whether good cause exists for early discovery, including “all 23 previous steps taken to locate the elusive defendant”); Bungie, Inc. v. Thorpe, No. 21-CV-05677- 24 EMC-DMR, 2021 WL 5178825, at *3 (N.D. Cal. Nov. 8, 2021) (“Generally, ex parte applications 25 for early discovery are accompanied by declarations which explain the party’s efforts to determine 26 the individual’s identity and why the plaintiff believes that subpoenas to particular service 27 providers would yield information regarding a defendant’s identity.” (quotation marks and citation 1 prejudice to Plaintiff re-filing the motion and providing supporting evidence in accordance with 2 || the Local Rules. DISTRI Cy SY 3 IT ISSO ORDERED. K, R) 4 || Dated: July 13, 2023 □□ DERED | 2[Frsss0 Dyhpaly Le 6 Z\ Chie Kind ate linge RYU \/2 O\ Wudee Pod □ 7 P □ 8 & © Ly OS 9 DISTRICS 10 11 a 12

4 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28

Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI

1 2 3 4 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 5 NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA 6 7 NORDIC NATURALS, INC., Case No. 23-cv-02606-DMR

8 Plaintiff, ORDER DENYING MOTION FOR 9 v. LEAVE TO SERVE A SUBPOENA WITHOUT PREJUDICE 10 JOHN DOES 1-50, INDIVIDUALLY OR AS CORPORATE/BUSINESS ENTITIES, Re: Dkt. No. 6 11 Defendant. 12 13 The court has reviewed Plaintiff Nordic Naturals, Inc.’s ex parte motion for leave to serve 14 a third-party subpoena prior to the Rule 26(f) conference. [Docket No. 6.] Civil Local Rule 7-5 15 provides that “[f]actual contentions made in support of . . . any motion must be supported by an 16 affidavit or declaration and by appropriate references to the record.” Civ. L.R. 7-5(a). While 17 Plaintiff submitted a declaration attaching a copy of its proposed subpoena (Docket No. 6-2), it did 18 not submit any evidence supporting the factual contentions in its motion. For example, Plaintiff 19 contends that it took “previous steps . . . to locate the Defendants,” including “investigating” their 20 “names and identities,” but did not provide evidence of any such investigation. See Mot. 3. See 21 Columbia Ins. Co. v. seescandy.com, 185 F.R.D. 573, 578-80 (N.D. Cal. 1999) (describing the 22 factors courts examine to determine whether good cause exists for early discovery, including “all 23 previous steps taken to locate the elusive defendant”); Bungie, Inc. v. Thorpe, No. 21-CV-05677- 24 EMC-DMR, 2021 WL 5178825, at *3 (N.D. Cal. Nov. 8, 2021) (“Generally, ex parte applications 25 for early discovery are accompanied by declarations which explain the party’s efforts to determine 26 the individual’s identity and why the plaintiff believes that subpoenas to particular service 27 providers would yield information regarding a defendant’s identity.” (quotation marks and citation 1 prejudice to Plaintiff re-filing the motion and providing supporting evidence in accordance with 2 || the Local Rules. DISTRI Cy SY 3 IT ISSO ORDERED. K, R) 4 || Dated: July 13, 2023 □□ DERED | 2[Frsss0 Dyhpaly Le 6 Z\ Chie Kind ate linge RYU \/2 O\ Wudee Pod □ 7 P □ 8 & © Ly OS 9 DISTRICS 10 11 a 12

4 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

Nordic Naturals, Inc. v. John Does 1-50, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/nordic-naturals-inc-v-john-does-1-50-cand-2023.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack