Strike 3 Holdings, LLC v. John Doe subscriber assigned IP address 76.220.25.52
- Joseph Spero
- 3:24-cv-03892
- U.S. District Court · Northern District of California
- 3
Judge Spero authorized Strike 3 Holdings v. John Doe to subpoena internet providers for the defendant’s identity before the required conference.
Strike 3 Holdings, LLC, AT&T Inc., any other identified internet service provider, and the subscriber associated with IP address 76.220.25.52. Subscribers and providers may challenge the subpoenas within the periods stated in the order.
What happened
In Strike 3 Holdings, LLC v. John Doe Subscriber Assigned IP Address 76.220.25.52, Strike 3 asked to serve a subpoena before the parties’ required preliminary conference. The subpoena seeks the name and address associated with the listed internet address.
Judge Spero found good cause and authorized Strike 3 to subpoena AT&T and any other internet provider identified in response. The providers must notify affected subscribers, who may challenge the subpoenas within 30 days.
Judge Spero also ordered providers to preserve the requested information and, if no timely challenge is filed, produce it after the specified waiting periods. Strike 3 may use the information only to protect its rights under copyright law.
The detailed version
- Strike 3 Holdings, LLC v. John Doe subscriber assigned IP address 76.220.25.52 · No. 3:24-cv-03892
- Joseph Spero
- Aug. 1, 2024
Background
Strike 3 Holdings, LLC asked for permission to serve a subpoena on a third party before the parties held the conference required by Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 26(f). The requested subpoena seeks the true name and address of the defendant associated with IP address 76.220.25.52.
Court’s ruling
The court found that Strike 3 had shown “good cause” to obtain the information. It authorized Strike 3 to serve AT&T Inc. with a subpoena under Rule 45. The court also authorized Strike 3 to serve the same type of subpoena on any internet service provider identified in response as providing internet services to the defendant.
The order states that the subpoenas qualify as court orders authorizing disclosure under 47 U.S.C. § 551. Each provider must give the affected subscriber a copy of the subpoena and the order within 30 days after service. Each subscriber and provider then has 30 days after service on that person or entity to file a motion challenging the subpoena, including a motion to quash or modify it.
If the 30-day period after service on the subscriber expires without a challenge, the provider has 10 days to produce the responsive information. Providers must preserve the subpoenaed information while awaiting production or the final resolution of a timely motion to quash. The information disclosed may be used only to protect Strike 3’s rights under the Copyright Act.
Disposition and classification
Judge Joseph C. Spero authorized the requested early third-party discovery subject to the notice, challenge, preservation, production, and use restrictions in the order. The order addressed discovery procedure and did not decide the merits of any copyright claim, so it is classified as a procedural order.
Read the full 3-page opinion on CourtListener, the free public archive maintained by the Free Law Project.