For the Record - Past Litigation Involving Investors Hub

Return to Summary

COR Clearing, LLC vs. Investorshub.com, Inc. (April, 2016)

United States District Court, Northern District of Florida
Case No. 4:16-CV-00013-RH-CAS

Summary: This is a discovery only action, seeking to compel iHub to produce on a subpoena for user account information to which iHub previously objected. iHub is not a party to the underlying litigation between COR Clearing and Calissio Resources Group and takes no position with respect to the merits of that action.

Outcome: On May 11, 2016 COR Clearing's Motion to Compel iHub's compliance with the subpoena was DENIED.

History:

The original subpoena issued by COR Clearing "("COR") was served to iHub in December 2015. The following week, iHub objected to the subpoena on numerous grounds, including but not limited to:

  • COR fails to identify any purportedly actionable posts by iHub users;
  • The scope of the subpoena would result in the production the private information of almost 1,000 user accounts;
  • COR has other, more definitive means of obtaining the identities of actual recipients of the contested dividends, e.g., from the member firms through whom the dividends were distributed;
  • Demanding the wholesale unmasking of iHub user accounts represents a violation of their constitutional right to speak anonymously;
  • The underlying claim does not refer to or include any allegations against iHub posters, and expressly states that COR "does not assert any claims against Calissio shareholders;"
  • COR has not satisfied the standards that courts have employed when seeking to unmask anonymous speakers whose First Amendment rights are at issue; and
  • The subpoena is overbroad, oppressive and unduly burdensome.

After iHub objected to the subpoena, COR sought to limit the production to fifty four (54) named user accounts. iHub declined, as the revision still did not overcome iHub's objections to the compelled disclosure of account information. On April 15, 2016 COR filed this discovery action by means of a Motion to Compel iHub to produce information with respect to (now) 35 user accounts .

On May 9, 2016 iHub filed a brief in opposition to COR's motion to compel production of the private user information.

On May 11, 2016 the Court issued a comprehensive order in favor of iHub denying COR's motion to compel iHub's production.

Media, Academia and Other Jurisprudence