UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF NORTH CAROLINA
WESTERN DIVISION
Case No.: 5:08-cv-115
ELEKTRA ENTERTAINMENT GROUP INC.,
a Delaware corporation; CAPITOL RECORDS,
INC., a Delaware corporation; SONY BMG
MUSIC ENTERTAINMENT, a Delaware
general partnership; UMG RECORDINGS,
INC., a Delaware corporation; and WARNER
BROS. RECORDS
INC.,
a Delaware
corporation,
Plaintiffs,
vs.
JOHN DOE,
Defendant.
§
§
§
§
§
§
§
§
§
§
§
§
§
§
§
PLAINTIFFS’ OPPOSITION TO
MOTION OF DEFENDANT JOHN DOE
TO DISMISS THE COMPLAINT,
STRIKE THE PLAINTIFFS’
AFFIDAVIT, AND QUASH THE
SUBPOENA
PLAINTIFFS’ OPPOSITION TO MOTION OF DEFENDANT JOHN DOE TO DISMISS
THE COMPLAINT, STRIKE THE PLAINTIFFS’ AFFIDAVIT, AND QUASH THE
SUBPOENA
Plaintiffs, through their undersigned counsel, submit the following Opposition to the
Motion of Defendant John Doe (“Defendant”) to Dismiss the Complaint, Strike the Plaintiffs’
Affidavit, and Quash the Subpoena (Def.’s Motion, Doc. No. 6). In support of their Opposition,
Plaintiffs state the following.
INTRODUCTION AND SUMMARY OF ARGUMENT
Defendant asks the Court to dismiss the Complaint, to strike the Declaration of Carlos
Linares (“Linares Declaration,” Att. No. 1 to Doc. No. 4), and to quash the subpoena issued to
North Carolina State University (“NCSU”), because: (1) Plaintiffs’ Complaint allegedly fails to
state a claim under Twombly, (2) Plaintiffs’ subpoena purportedly violates Defendant’s First
2
Amendment Rights, and (3) the Linares Declaration is supposedly improper. All three of
Defendant’s Motions should be denied.
First, in Defendant’s Motion to Dismiss Plaintiffs’ Complaint, Defendant argues that
Plaintiffs’ Complaint fails under the pleading standard set forth in Bell Atlantic Corp. v.
Twombly, 547 U.S. ---, 127 S. Ct. 1955 (2007) because it does not allege infringement of any
rights protected by §106 of the Copyright Act. (“Def.’s Br.,” Doc. No. 7, p. 3.) On the contrary,
Plaintiffs’ Complaint provides detailed,