Claritymask v. Individuals
Claritymask, Inc. v. The Individuals, Partnerships, and Unincorporated Associations Identified on Schedule A
- Lewis Liman
- 1:23-cv-08877
- U.S. District Court · Southern District of New York
- 2
In Claritymask, Inc. v. The Individuals, Judge Liman granted discovery from Amazon to identify defendants for service.
Claritymask, Inc. and Colleen Elizabeth Rein may seek identifying information from Amazon about the unidentified Schedule A defendants. The order also affects those defendants’ privacy interests, but it does not resolve the infringement claims against them.
What happened
In Claritymask, Inc. v. The Individuals, Claritymask, Inc. and Colleen Elizabeth Rein sought permission to obtain information from Amazon about the unidentified defendants listed in the complaint.
The requested names, addresses, and email addresses were intended to identify the defendants and allow the plaintiffs to serve them with the lawsuit. The court found that the request was reasonable, supported by good cause, and that the plaintiffs had no other apparent way to obtain the information.
Judge Liman granted the plaintiffs’ motion and authorized them to seek the requested information from Amazon. The order did not decide whether the defendants infringed copyright or trademark rights.
The detailed version
- Claritymask v. Individuals · No. 1:23-cv-08877
- Lewis Liman
- Apr. 11, 2024
Background
Claritymask, Inc. and Colleen Elizabeth Rein sued the individuals, partnerships, and unincorporated associations identified on Schedule A of the complaint. The defendants’ identities were not stated in the caption. The plaintiffs asked for permission to seek third-party and jurisdictional discovery from Amazon.com, Inc. “Jurisdictional discovery” is information sought to help establish who the defendants are or whether the court can exercise authority over them.
The Request
The plaintiffs sought the names, addresses, and email addresses associated with the Amazon accounts of the Schedule A defendants. The opinion states that the plaintiffs alleged copyright and trademark infringement and had made a preliminary showing sufficient for the discovery request. It also states that the plaintiffs appeared to have no other way to obtain the alleged infringers’ identities, and that the requested information was specific enough to move the case toward service of process.
Ruling
Judge Lewis J. Liman granted the plaintiffs’ motion for leave to seek the discovery. The court authorized the plaintiffs to obtain from Amazon the names, addresses, and email addresses associated with the accounts of the Schedule A defendants. The order addressed discovery needed to identify and serve the defendants; it did not decide the underlying copyright or trademark infringement claims.
Read the full 2-page opinion on CourtListener, the free public archive maintained by the Free Law Project.