Binbit Argentina, S.A. v. Roe Corporation

Good Law
United States District Court, Northern District of CaliforniaSeptember 24, 20194:19-cv-05384California863 words

Opinion

trial_court Opinion

1 2 3 4 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 5 NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA 6 7 BINBIT ARGENTINA, S.A., Case No. 19-cv-05384-KAW

8 Plaintiff,

ORDER DENYING EX PARTE

9 v. MOTION FOR EARLY DISCOVERY

10 JOHN DOES 1-25, et al., Re: Dkt. No. 5 11 Defendants.

12 13 On August 27, 2019, Plaintiff Binbit Argentina, S.A. filed the instant case, asserting claims 14 for breach of contract and violations of the Computer Fraud and Abuse Act. (Compl. at 1, Dkt. 15 No. 1.) Plaintiff is an Argentinian company that provides mobile entertainment services. (Compl. 16 ¶ 6.) To attract new customers, Plaintiff contracts with companies (“Networks”) that offer online 17 marketing services through third parties called affiliates (“Affiliates”), who create advertising 18 campaigns to encourage customers to use Plaintiff’s services. (Compl. ¶¶ 12, 13.) 19 Plaintiffs allege that between February and April 2017, Defendants – an unknown Affiliate 20 and/or Network – “created a misleading and fraudulent advertising campaign to sign up for 21 [Plaintiff]’s…

Sign in to read the full opinion

Create a free account to read the complete opinion text, citation history, and good-law status for this case.