Keep On Kicking Music, Inc v. Universal Music Group, Inc.
- James Oetken
- 1:23-cv-04400
- U.S. District Court · Southern District of New York
- 4
In Keep On Kicking Music v. UMG Recordings, Judge Moses granted permission to serve subpoenas on Jerry Duplessis by mail and email.
The ruling affects the Universal Defendants, who may serve subpoenas on Jerry Duplessis by certified mail and registered email, and Duplessis, who must receive notice and an opportunity to object.
What happened
Keep On Kicking Music, Inc. v. UMG Recordings, Inc. concerned a request by the Universal Defendants to serve two subpoenas on non-party Jerry Duplessis, the chief executive officer of defendant Idaly Publishing, Inc.
The court authorized service by certified mail to an address in Caldwell, New Jersey, and by registered email to four email addresses. It found that the Universal Defendants had made diligent but unsuccessful attempts to serve Duplessis personally and that the proposed methods were reasonably likely to notify him and give him a chance to object.
The court granted the motion and required the Universal Defendants to serve Duplessis with a copy of the order along with the subpoenas. The order was issued by Judge Barbara Moses.
The detailed version
- Keep On Kicking Music, Inc v. Universal Music Group, Inc. · No. 1:23-cv-04400
- James Oetken
- July 10, 2025
Background
The Universal Defendants filed an unopposed letter-motion asking for permission to serve two discovery subpoenas on non-party Jerry Duplessis. One subpoena sought testimony, and the other sought documents. The proposed service methods were certified mail to an address in Caldwell, New Jersey, and registered email to four email addresses Duplessis had used or was currently using.
Court’s Analysis
Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 45 requires delivery of a subpoena to the named person but does not define “delivering.” The court explained that courts in the Southern District of New York have authorized alternative service methods when they are reasonably likely to result in actual receipt, provide notice, and give the recipient an opportunity to object. Courts also generally require a prior diligent attempt at personal service.
The Universal Defendants showed that a process server attempted to serve Duplessis seven times between June 17 and June 23, 2025, at the Caldwell address. The process server spoke with a woman at the residence on one occasion and spoke with Duplessis by telephone, but Duplessis did not say when he would be available. On another occasion, the process server waited at the residence for an hour after being told Duplessis would arrive, but Duplessis did not appear. The court found these efforts diligent and stated that the interactions suggested Duplessis knew the Universal Defendants were trying to serve him and might be avoiding service.
The Universal Defendants also provided records connecting Duplessis and Idaly Publishing to the Caldwell address. The proposed email addresses included two that had been used in 2020 and 2021 and two that were listed on Duplessis’s active business websites. The court concluded that the certified mailing, combined with the registered emails, was reasonably calculated to reach Duplessis and notify him of the subpoenas.
Ruling
The court granted the Universal Defendants’ motion, docketed as Dkt. 148. It authorized service by certified mail to the Caldwell address and by registered email to the four listed addresses. The Universal Defendants were required to serve Duplessis with a copy of the order along with the subpoenas.
Read the full 4-page opinion on CourtListener, the free public archive maintained by the Free Law Project.