The motion also states that RIAA lawyers have refused to answer questions by the AG's office regarding whether they had engaged in data mining to find "personal and confidential information." Now the Attorney General would like to know "precisely how invasive Plaintiffs' investigation was." Specifically, it says "Plaintiffs may be spying on students who use the University's computer system and may be accessing much more than IP addresses."
The motion also requests the court to require the RIAA to "Describe with particularity the economic damage, if any, that the RIAA suffered as a result of the unlawful conduct of each Doe Defendant." This is certainly something that many people would like explained. Of course since the RIAA is normally facing individuals without the deep pockets required to pay for a sustained legal battle they're normally not taken to task for their damage claims.
Depending on whether the judge allows the discovery asked for by the Attorney General, and what answers he gets from RIAA representatives, it seems likely that this will will end up being a landmark case that either signals the beginning of the end of the RIAA's legal jihad or legal justification for even more suits.
Source: Ars Technica