United States District Court, N.D. Illinois, Eastern Division
June 15, 2005.
DIRECTV, INC. Plaintiff,
DION YARBOUGH, Defendant.
The opinion of the court was delivered by: WILLIAM HART, Senior District Judge
MEMORANDUM OPINION AND ORDER
Plaintiff DirecTV is a provider of satellite television
broadcasts. Plaintiff claims that defendant Dion Yarbough used
illegal piracy devices to intercept its signal. Plaintiff has
moved for summary judgment and defendant was provided an
opportunity to respond to the motion. Defendant, who is
represented by counsel, did not file any response.*fn1 Since
defendant has not responded to the motion for summary judgment,
all the facts contained in plaintiff's Local Rule 56.1 statement
will be deemed to be admitted, but it still must be determined
whether those facts support judgment as a matter of law. Johnson v. Gudmundsson, 35 F.3d 1104, 1116 (7th Cir. 1994);
Wienco, Inc. v. Katahn Associates, Inc., 965 F.2d 565, 567-68
(7th Cir. 1992); Herman v. City of Chicago, 870 F.2d 400, 404
(7th Cir. 1989). Although plaintiff has claimed violations of
various federal statutes and the common law tort of conversion,
plaintiff is satisfied to be awarded $10,000.00 statutory damages
plus costs and attorneys fees for the violation of
18 U.S.C. § 2511(1)(a). Therefore, that is the only claim that need be
The following facts set forth in plaintiff's Local Rule 56.1
Statement are taken as true. Via satellite, DirecTV provides
television programming to residential and business customers on a
subscription and pay-per-view basis. DirecTV's signal is
encrypted (electronically scrambled) in order to provide security
and prevent unauthorized viewing of its programming. A number of
individuals and companies sell devices that illegally circumvent
the encryption technology and thereby pirate DirecTV's
programming. In August 2001, defendant purchased devices for
pirating DirecTV's signal. At an address in Naperville, Illinois,
defendant intentionally used the devices to obtain unauthorized
accesses to DirecTV programming.
Unauthorized interception of satellite television signals
violates § 2511(1)(a). United States v. Shriver, 989 F.2d 898,
901-02 (7th Cir. 1992); DirecTV, Inc. v. Vanderploeg, 2005 WL 497797 *2 (N.D. Ill. March 2, 2005); DirecTV, Inc. v. Borow,
2005 WL 43261 *5 (N.D. Ill. Jan. 6, 2005); DirecTV, Inc. v.
Benson, 333 F. Supp. 2d 440, 449-56 (M.D.N.C. 2004). For
violation of that statute, plaintiff is entitled to $10,000.00
statutory damages, plus reasonable attorneys fees and costs.
18 U.S.C. §§ 2520(b) (3), 2520(c) (2) (B); DirecTV Inc. v.
Valenti, 2005 WL 1268721 *1 (E.D. Wis. May 19, 2005); DirecTV,
Inc. v. Beecher, 296 F. Supp. 2d 937, 942 (S.D. Ind. 2003). A
judgment will be entered in plaintiff's favor. Plaintiff shall
submit its motion for fees and costs within the time permitted by
Local Rule. See Loc. R. 54.1(a), 54.3(b).
IT IS THEREFORE ORDERED that plaintiff's motion for summary
judgment  is granted. The Clerk of the Court is directed to
enter judgment in favor of plaintiff and against defendant in the
amount of $10,000.00 plus reasonable costs and attorneys fees.