Fake Ringtones Plaintiffs’ Reply Brief Raised ‘Improper’ New Arguments: T-Mobile

T-Mobile moved to strike “improper arguments made for the first time” in the March 13 reply brief of plaintiffs Craigville Telephone and Consolidated Telephone in support of a special master to oversee discovery in their fake ringtones case against the carrier (see 2303140034), in a motion Monday (docket 1:19-cv-07190) in U.S. District Court for Northern Illinois in Chicago. T-Mobile, in the alternative, seeks leave to file a sur reply to address the new arguments, it said. The plaintiffs, in their reply brief, “specifically advocate for a special master” to oversee call data record discovery, said T-Mobile’s motion. The reply brief contains pages of “substantive arguments and false and misleading characterizations of matters supposedly related to the production of CDRs” not included in their original motion for a special master, it said. The new arguments are “irrelevant,” and don’t support the appointment of a special master, especially considering the agreement of former co-defendant to produce CDRs under subpoenas served by both parties, it said. If the court finds the new arguments relevant, T-Mobile “was improperly denied the opportunity to respond to them because they were made for the first time” in the reply brief, it said. The new arguments are “improper and should be stricken,” it said. In the alternative, leave should be granted to permit T-Mobile to respond to them, it said.