FB Select LLC v. Ocean Blue Trading LLC
- P. Castel
- 1:24-cv-08425
- U.S. District Court · Southern District of New York
- 6
In FB Select v. Ocean Blue, Judge Castel denied without prejudice an application for early discovery, allowing renewal at the initial conference.
FB Select LLC’s request for permission to serve early discovery on Ocean Blue Trading LLC was denied without prejudice to renewal at the initial conference. The ruling also concerns the unidentified defendants whose identities FB Select sought.
What happened
FB Select LLC sued Ocean Blue Trading LLC and unidentified defendants. FB Select sought permission to obtain information before the parties’ required discovery conference, including the identities of Ocean Blue’s principals and suppliers of Klaire Products.
FB Select argued that Ocean Blue was reselling Klaire Products on Amazon without authorization and that early discovery was necessary to identify additional defendants and prevent further harm. It requested permission to serve Ocean Blue with a subpoena for those identities.
In FB Select LLC v. Ocean Blue Trading LLC, Judge P. Kevin Castel denied the application without prejudice to renewal at the initial conference. The order does not explain the reasons for the denial.
The detailed version
- FB Select LLC v. Ocean Blue Trading LLC · No. 1:24-cv-08425
- P. Castel
- Nov. 12, 2024
Background
FB Select LLC, doing business as Front Row Group, sued Ocean Blue Trading LLC and John Does 1–10. The motion addressed in the order sought permission to conduct discovery before the parties held the conference required by Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 26(f).
Motion and Plaintiff’s Position
FB Select asked to serve a subpoena under Rule 45 on Ocean Blue. It sought the identities of Ocean Blue’s principals and the suppliers allegedly providing Ocean Blue with Klaire Products for resale. FB Select asserted that it was the exclusive Amazon distributor for those products and that Ocean Blue’s suppliers were violating supplier agreements by selling to an unauthorized reseller. FB Select also asserted that it had tried to obtain the information through cease-and-desist letters, emails, and telephone calls but had been unsuccessful.
The motion argued that courts may allow discovery before the Rule 26(f) conference when a plaintiff shows good cause, particularly when the discovery is needed to identify unknown defendants. FB Select said the requested information would allow it to identify and add parties to the case and protect the Klaire brand, Front Row’s interests, and consumers.
Ruling
Judge P. Kevin Castel denied the application without prejudice to renewal at the initial conference. The order did not authorize the requested early discovery, and the opinion text does not state the court’s reasons for denying the application. The order was signed and dated November 12, 2024.
Read the full 6-page opinion on CourtListener, the free public archive maintained by the Free Law Project.