R&D FILM 1, LLC (a.k.a., “R & D Film 1, LLC”)

I have added this page for internet users who have been entangled in the R&D Film 1, LLC (a.k.a., “R & D Film 1, LLC”) cases.  The goal here is to keep up to date on this plaintiff, and to discuss their various cases.  Should you learn of any updates regarding one of their cases, please post it here using the following format — (e.g., “R&D Film 1, LLC v. Does 1-52 (Case No. 1:12-cv-05810) filed in the U.S. District Court for the Northern District of Illinois”).  Please also feel free to post new cases you find on the http://www.rfcexpress.com website where R&D Film 1, LLC is listed as the plaintiff.

Remember to please exercise discretion when posting (e.g., do not post your real name or e-mail address), and as usual, avoid using vulgar or offensive language (both towards the plaintiff and towards other users).

45 thoughts on “R&D FILM 1, LLC (a.k.a., “R & D Film 1, LLC”)”

    R&D Film 1, LLC v. Does 1-52 (Case No. 1:12-cv-05810)
    R&D Film 1, LLC v. Does 1-20 (Case No. 1:12-cv-05817)
    R&D Film 1, LLC v. Does 1-57 (Case No. 1:12-cv-05821)
    R&D Film 1, LLC v. Does 1-62 (Case No. 1:12-cv-05822)
    R&D Film 1, LLC v. Does 1-36 (Case No. 1:12-cv-05823)
    R&D Film 1, LLC v. Does 1-88 (Case No. 1:12-cv-05825)
    R&D Film 1, LLC v. Does 1-29 (Case No. 1:12-cv-05827)
    R&D Film 1, LLC v. Does 1-20 (Case No. 1:12-cv-05828)

  2. New cases as of 10/17/12:

    R&D Film 1, LLC v. Does 1-33 (Case No. 4:12-cv-01741)
    R&D Film 1, LLC v. Does 1-39 (Case No. 4:12-cv-01742)
    R&D Film 1, LLC v. Does 1-35 (Case No. 4:12-cv-01743)
    R&D Film 1, LLC v. Does 1-14 (Case No. 4:12-cv-01754)

    • It’s *Harness* Dickey & Pierce. This is easily the biggest, most prestigious law firm to ever get involved in copyright troll actions. Times must be tough for even the silk-stocking law firms.

    • I am included as a Doe and received a registered letter on 4/13/2013.
      One of the forms included is a “NOTICE” to Doe #1 (presumable me) which seems to say I should complete and return the form to the sender within thirty days to avoid physical service which they say could increase my costs.

      But another form “SUMMONS IN A CIVIL ACTION” addressed to Does 1-35 says I must serve on plaintiff an answer to the attached complaint within 21 days with the warning that if I fail to respond, judgement by default will be entered against me for the relief demanded in the complaint. and further states I must file my answer or motion with the court.

      So what am I to believe? 30 days to say I got the letter? 21 days to file an answer or motion?

      • thanks,
        I registered with PACER as suggested.
        then looked up the case 4:12-cv-01743 and was surprised to find a “NOTICE OF DISMISSAL” had been filed on 4/16/13.

        The Dismissal without prejudice is for Does 1, 6, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, 30 ,35

        Does 18, 20, 22 dismissed with prejudice because they entered a settlement

        It doesn’t mention the other Does…

        Does this mean they have dropped the case against me? Can I go about my day and not worry about it anymore?

    • I have blocked out your name to protect your privacy, and I have sent an e-mail to you personally in response. R&D Film 1, LLC (as awkward as the name is to write) started out as a copyright troll placing their little toe into the courts to see what they can pull as far as settlements. I assume they have had some success, and now they are broadening their lawsuits to ensnare more Doe Defendants in their nets. Don’t be fooled — these trolls can be fought using the same arguments as any of the others. An IP address still does not conclusively link to the subscriber as the downloader.

      • I am in same situation – just got notification from ISP for a case in US district court – Western Washington. Curious as to what amount these people are suing for the alleged copyright infringement?

  3. Can you email me some advice. I’m staying with my Aunt and she is being targeted by R&D Film 1, LLC. They refuse to tell her what movie it is that we supposedly downloaded, and the only reason I think it is for the movie “The Divide” is because this is the only place I can find on a search engine for R&D Film 1, LLC. I vaguely remember this as a movie that my brother watched legally on cable (I think on ShowTime), and I didn’t download it because what little of it I watched was terrible, and my brother wouldn’t download a movie he already watched and didn’t like himself, and I even took the time to search his computer’s history and I didn’t find it. My Aunt has talked to some lawyers and they said it may be a different movie. Is R&D Film 1, LLC suing anyone for any other movies? And exactly how should we articulate our innocence? Showing our computers will not help since histories can be cleared, so it is our word against theirs, and they claim to have “proof”

    • In the lawsuit complaint (it is usually the first document in the court’s docket on PACER), the plaintiff attorneys will usually list the title of the film they are accusing the defendant of downloading. However, quite frankly, more important than the title of the film is the mere fact that you have a copyright troll who has ensnared your aunt in their web of lawsuits. R&D Film 1, LLC sues defendants across the U.S., and quite frankly, I have seen no evidence yet that they have any intention of going after anyone which suggests to me that they are a settlement factory and in my opinion a scam. That being said, whether you use my firm or any other attorney, DO NOT engage them yourself. In my opinion, their operation should be criminal.

  4. It looks like more cases have been filed with R & D Film 1, LLC v. Does ____ per Justia Dockets website. Any news on recent rulings? Any cases thrown out? I wish I had access to the filings

    • Setup a PACER account; Download RECAP Firefox plug-in so you benefit from when one of us pays for a document and uploads it to RECAP (our quarterly PACER bill is gigantic; no need for yours to be as well since we upload everything to RECAP). http://archive.recapthelaw.org/ is also a good resource (click the “advanced” tab).

      The only drawback that you need to be aware of with RECAP is that they often get severely lagged and documents do not immediately post to their service even though we pay for them and upload them to RECAP (the process is automatic since we have the plug-in running on our computers). This is just a server limitation on their part, and I wouldn’t expect any less from a free and popular plug-in.

  5. it should be noted that a pacer account is FREE to set up, and if you only buy a couple of documents per quarter the fees are waved first $15ish i think. if you do it with a CC you can get your login info within a day otherwise they mail you it and it can take up to 2 weeks. and again please get the recap plug in for firefox.

  6. Here’s a new one:
    My folks just got served a subpoena (letter from Comcast): R&D Film 1, LLC v Does 1-92. They are elderly and I know did nothing wrong; possibly someone else using their IP address. . . . We’re in the N. IL district. Chicago judge is Joan H. Lefkow. We have until 1/23/13 before they release the personal information.

    I’m reading that a motion to quash does no good. I’m thinking either hiring an attorney as a shield, or doing nothing and praying it goes away. I will not have them appear in court or settle. What do you suggest?

  7. i need an legal advice.. i got brought into this case. I’m really scared what’s going to happen to me… I’m only 16 years old. i don’t want my family to be ruined. Too much stress.

    R & D Film 1 LLC v. Does 1-46 (Case No. 2:13-cv-00050)
    R & D Film 1 LLC v. Does 1-45 (Case No. 2:13-cv-00051)
    R & D Film 1 LLC v. Does 1-41 (Case No. 2:13-cv-00052)
    R & D Film 1 LLC v. Does 1-22 (Case No. 2:13-cv-00053)
    R & D Film 1 LLC v. Does 1-51 (Case No. 2:13-cv-00054)
    R & D Film 1 LLC v. Does 1-50 (Case No. 2:13-cv-00055)
    R & D Film 1 LLC v. Does 1-44 (Case No. 2:13-cv-00056)
    R & D Film 1 LLC v. Does 1-16 (Case No. 2:13-cv-00057)

    In total, on January 8th, 2013, Richard Symmes sued a total of 315 John Doe Defendants, all apparently living in Washington.

    I wrote about it here in my “(WAWD) R&D Film 1, LLC hires Richard Symmes to file against 315 Defendants” article.

    • I have responded to your comment via e-mail. I have been successful with negotiating down their settlement amounts. One thing more importantly to consider is that they are using half-baked settlement agreement which are missing some terms you need to protect your interests so that you are not sued again later (or hit with attorney fees), etc. This is why people hire attorneys to handle their settlements, although the cost discount is certainly a side benefit (and in certain circumstances can be substantial).

  9. Can you be legally served a subpoena through the mail system though? I thought the police would have to hand them to you directly for it to be considered. I had a friend who works for the government look at the paper work for me and he said that unless an officer knocked on my door and handed the paper work to me that it is not a subpoena, and that I shouldn’t do any action unless other wise. Also I just recently opened my second notice for the case and its 02/04/13 tomorrow is my last day to negotiate the fee and I don’t know what to do, I’m a little worried now with the threats set against me… When I received my first notice of the case I didn’t take it seriously I thought it was just a scam. Please help.

    • Annon, service of process can happen many ways, one of which is waiving service by accepting service through the mail. This would only happen once you are actually named as a defendant, so the paperwork you received in the mail was not “service” but rather, it was likely notification by your ISP that you were implicated in a lawsuit. Obviously I would have to speak to you to learn all the details, but officers knocking on doors relates to CRIMINAL MATTERS, and copyright infringement lawsuits are CIVIL LAWSUITS which have absoutely ZERO to do with police, etc.

  10. I got this letter today in WA state and don’t think I have ever downloaded the movie they are pursuing. What do I need to do about this?

  11. I just got paperwork on the r&d Does 1-35 case and have not downloaded this movie, I explained to the lawyer that I didn’t even have a computer at the time. They say they talked to their client and are willing to let me settle for $4500. They want me to fill out the paperwork and send it back. What should I do.

  12. Only 2 questions
    the letter i got from my provider with no other notice,said i need to responed
    i do not know what there talking about , my computer is on loan from the state welfare system, i am on disability, I am not even allowed to stream or down load. my question is ? if i ignore, what will R&D Film , LLC get, or suck out of me. My computer is owed by welfare I am not allowed to download anything ,and i havent. the letter said they want a judgment to search my home and equipment. There is nothing to find . I have been reasearching, i am not retarded but careful. R&D Film 1, llC WANTS TO APPAERANTLY CAUSE A PROBLEM WITH A DISABLED PERSON. such as my self i have till may 10. to respond. The only thing i get. is if I dont I lose. please any advise before I blow them off

  13. I also received the letter from my isp. please advise what should i do know. I have until may 10th to file a protective motion to quash or vacate the subpoena. I’m from western WA as well. thanks.

  14. I just got notice from Cox Cable today saying my IP information will be released on the 29 for the download of The Divide. I have had 2 roommates and people in and out of my house all the time. Some use the WiFi for their laptops and some of them have used my computer. I’m kind if freaking out over here. I am not aware of any downlosds going on. I’m cheap , I buy all my DVDs second hand.. advice would be greatly helpful!

    • Ok. I have received the first of the ransom letter so far asking for $4000 or they may name me a doe. Please any advice I would be overwhelmingly thankful for.

    • I have sent a reply to your e-mail address, which I have removed from your post and marked “[PRIVATE].” In sum, you should not be speaking about your roommates or your internet activities publicly, as this could cause your plaintiff attorneys to start threatening to name them as the defendant unless you settled their claims against you. It is an unethical trick they use — hold your friends hostage unless you settle their claims.

  15. Just received a letter 06/16/13, stating “that my CenturyLink was subpoenas to get information” Does 1-25 does not state what was downloaded and has a download date of 12/28/12 case id 13-CV-00432-WYD-MEH Denver. Please help do not know what was downloaded on Bit Torrent and what I should do?


Leave a Comment