Case 2:12-cv-08333-DMG-PJW Document 20 Filed 12/12/12 Page 1of2 Page ID #:195

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
CENTRAL DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA
CIVIL MINUTES—GENERAL
Case No. CV 12-8333-DMG (PJWx) Date December 12, 2012

Title Ingenuity 13 LLC v. John Doe Page 1 of 2

Present: The Honorable DOLLY M. GEE, UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE

VALENCIA VALLERY NOT REPORTED
Deputy Clerk Court Reporter
Attorneys Present for Plaintiff(s) Attorneys Present for Defendant(s)
None Present None Present

Proceedings: INCHAMBERS - ORDER TO COMPLY WITH FEp. R. Civ. P. 4(m)

On September 27, 2012, Plaintiff Ingenuity 13 LLC (‘Plaintiff’) filed the above-
captioned action in this Court against Defendant John Doe (“Defendant”), alleging violations of
the Copyright Act, 17 U.S.C. § 101 et seq.

Rule 10(a) of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure states that “[t]he title of the complaint
must name all the parties; the title of other pleadings, after naming the first party on each side,
may refer generally to other parties.” Nonetheless, “where the identity of alleged defendants will
not be known prior to the filing of a complaint . . . the plaintiff should be given an opportunity
through discovery to identify the unknown defendants.” Gillespie v. Civiletti, 629 F.2d 637, 642
(9th Cir. 1980); see also Patrick Collins Inc. v. Does, No. C 10-05886 LB, 2011 WL 5368874
(N.D. Cal. Nov. 4, 2011) (copyright action discussing standards for serving Doe defendants).

Additionally, Rule 4(m) provides:

If a defendant is not served within 120 days after the complaint is
filed, the court — on motion or on its own after notice to the
plaintiff — must dismiss the action without prejudice against that
defendant or order that service be made within a specified time.
But if the plaintiff shows good cause for the failure, the court must
extend the time for service for an appropriate period.

Fed. R. Civ. P. 4(m).
Here, Plaintiff states that Defendant’s actual name is unknown to Plaintiff and that

Defendant is known to Plaintiff only by the Internet Protocol address 108.13.119.253. Plaintiff
states that it cannot ascertain Defendant’s actual identity without limited early discovery.

CV-90 CIVIL MINUTES—GENERAL Initials of Deputy Clerk VV

Case 2:12-cv-08333-DMG-PJW Document 20 Filed 12/12/12 Page 2of2 Page ID #:196

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
CENTRAL DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA
CIVIL MINUTES—GENERAL
Case No. CV 12-8333-DMG (PJWx) Date December 12, 2012

Title Ingenuity 13 LLC v. John Doe Page 2 of 2

Therefore, this Order serves to notify Plaintiff of Rule 4(m) and warn Plaintiff that it
must abide by Rule 4(m)’s requirement to serve the defendant within 120 days of filing the
Complaint, including by timely seeking leave to conduct early limited discovery pursuant to Rule
26(d)(1), or show good cause why, through due diligence, the defendant’s identity cannot be
ascertained by that time. Failure to timely and adequately comply as required herein by serving
the defendant or showing good cause why the defendant cannot be ascertained by January 28,
2013, will result in the summary dismissal of this action.

IT IS SO ORDERED.

CV-90 CIVIL MINUTES—GENERAL Initials of Deputy Clerk VV