Court, Explained
U.S. Federal District Courts
←Back to docket
S.D.N.Y.Procedural orderFiled Jan. 14, 2022

Sellas Life Sciences Group, Inc. v. Doe

Judge
Denise Cote
Docket
1:21-cv-06014
Court
U.S. District Court · Southern District of New York
Pages
3
DiscoveryCivil ProcedureIntellectual Property
In one sentence

In Sellas Life Sciences Group v. John Doe, Judge Nathan allowed expedited discovery to identify an anonymous defendant in a copyright and defamation suit.

Who this affects

The ruling affects Sellas Life Sciences Group, Inc., the other plaintiff, and anonymous defendant John Doe. It permits the plaintiffs to subpoena Yahoo! Finance to seek Doe’s identity before the usual discovery conference.

What happened

Sellas Life Sciences Group and another plaintiff sued an unidentified person known as John Doe for copyright infringement and defamation. They alleged that Doe used the name and photograph of Sellas’s CEO on a Yahoo! Finance forum and posted statements they said were inaccurate and harmful.

The court had ordered the plaintiffs to explain why the copyright claim should not be dismissed because the alleged use might be legally protected as fair use. The court found the plaintiffs had shown enough to avoid deciding that issue immediately and to give Doe a chance to respond. The plaintiffs also asked to subpoena Yahoo! Finance before the usual discovery conference to learn Doe’s identity.

The court granted the plaintiffs’ motion to expedite discovery and allowed them to serve a third-party subpoena on Yahoo! Finance to identify John Doe. Judge Alison J. Nathan did not decide the fair-use issue in this order and scheduled an initial pretrial conference.

The detailed version

For law students, journalists, and other readers who want the full reasoning

Case
Sellas Life Sciences Group, Inc. v. Doe · No. 1:21-cv-06014
Judge
Denise Cote
Date
Jan. 14, 2022

Background

Sellas Life Sciences Group, Inc., and another plaintiff sued unknown defendant John Doe for copyright infringement and defamation. According to the complaint, Doe posted on a Yahoo! Finance online forum using the name of Angelos M. Stergiou, identified in the opinion as Sellas’s CEO. Doe also allegedly used Stergiou’s professional headshot from his LinkedIn profile and personal website.

The posts included statements that Stergiou had a “cocaine and rare white tiger addiction” and “loves[s] Drunk driving and pumping scam stocks.” The plaintiffs alleged that the posts, including the use of the headshot, violated Stergiou’s copyright and harmed both plaintiffs’ business savvy, reputation, and goodwill.

Fair-Use Issue

The court had ordered the plaintiffs to show cause—meaning to explain—why the copyright-infringement claim should not be dismissed because the alleged conduct was fair use as a matter of law. The plaintiffs responded. The court concluded that they had made an adequate showing of copyright infringement and would not decide the fair-use issue before giving Doe an opportunity to submit briefing.

Expedited Discovery

The plaintiffs moved for permission to seek discovery before the parties’ required conference under Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 26(f). Their proposed discovery consisted of a subpoena to Yahoo! Finance to obtain information identifying John Doe.

The court applied five factors: whether the plaintiffs had made an initial showing of infringement; whether the request was specific; whether other ways existed to obtain the information; whether the information was needed to advance the claims; and Doe’s expectation of privacy. Relying substantially on the reasons in the plaintiffs’ motion, the court concluded that these factors favored expedited discovery.

Ruling

The court granted the plaintiffs’ motion to expedite discovery by allowing them to serve a third-party subpoena before the Rule 26(f) conference to learn John Doe’s identity. The order resolved docket numbers 4 and 5. It did not decide whether the alleged copyright use was fair use. The court also set an initial pretrial conference for March 25, 2022, and directed the parties to submit a proposed case-management plan and joint letter seven days beforehand.

The authoritative version

Read the full 3-page opinion on CourtListener, the free public archive maintained by the Free Law Project.

Open opinion PDF →
Summary written with AI assistance. See how summaries are made. Spot something wrong? Tell us.