Pearson Education, Inc. v. Doe 1

Background

The court received an attached letter labeled “Opposition to Plaintiffs First Amended Complaint.” The letter was unsigned. Judge Ronnie Abrams stated that it might be a response from Defendant Rodney Blanks, but it appeared to have been sent by Patrick Blanks in Miami, Florida. The court therefore found it unclear who intended to file the letter.

Contents of the Letter

The letter stated that Coberts Little Shop LLC, Rodney Blanks, and Lois Flonnory did not purchase or sell counterfeit books and did not know that any books were counterfeit. It asserted that books were purchased from a third-party contact, shipped directly to Amazon’s warehouse, and later destroyed after the defendants were unable to sell them. It also disputed the alleged sources of certain purchases and described the defendants’ use of Amazon, eBay, and ABE Books.

The letter further stated that Coberts Little Shop LLC was the legal entity responsible for the book sales, that the Amazon account belonged to Lois Flonnory, and that the defendants had stopped selling books. These statements were presented in the letter; the order did not decide whether they were true.

Court’s Action

The court did not decide the merits of the publishers’ claims or the defenses described in the letter. Instead, it directed the individual who wanted the court to consider the letter to resend a revised letter to the Pro Se Intake Unit at the specified address, make clear who the letter was from, and sign it. The court attached an answer form for people representing themselves without lawyers and directed the Clerk of Court to mail a copy of the order to Patrick Blanks at the address listed in the order.

Disposition

The order is a procedural filing directive. It neither accepted nor rejected the letter’s factual assertions and did not rule on the underlying claims.