Strike 3 Holdings, LLC v. John Doe subscriber assigned IP address 99.47.171.105
- Cisneros
- 3:24-cv-06065
- U.S. District Court · Northern District of California
- 3
In Strike 3 Holdings v. John Doe, Judge Cisneros allowed a subpoena to identify the defendant but required notice, confidentiality, and time to challenge it.
Strike 3 Holdings, LLC may seek the defendant’s identifying information from AT&T Internet or another identified internet service provider. The subscriber may receive notice and may challenge, quash, or modify the subpoena within 30 days. The internet provider must preserve the information and follow the order’s production and confidentiality requirements.
What happened
Strike 3 Holdings, LLC asked the court for permission to subpoena AT&T Internet before the parties held their required early case-management meeting. The defendant was identified only by the internet address assigned to the account.
The court found good cause and allowed Strike 3 Holdings to serve a subpoena seeking the defendant’s true name and address. The internet provider must notify the subscriber, preserve the information, and give the subscriber 30 days to challenge the subpoena. Strike 3 Holdings may use the information only to protect and enforce the rights described in its complaint, and identifying information must initially be filed under seal.
Judge Lisa J. Cisneros issued the order on October 8, 2024.
The detailed version
- Strike 3 Holdings, LLC v. John Doe subscriber assigned IP address 99.47.171.105 · No. 3:24-cv-06065
- Cisneros
- Oct. 8, 2024
Background
Strike 3 Holdings, LLC filed an ex parte application, meaning a request made without first obtaining the opposing party’s participation, for permission to serve a third-party subpoena before the parties’ Rule 26(f) conference. The subpoena sought information identifying the defendant associated with the listed internet protocol address. The proposed recipient was AT&T Internet, identified as the internet service provider.
Court’s Order
The court found that Strike 3 Holdings had established good cause to serve the subpoena. It allowed the plaintiff to serve AT&T Internet with a Rule 45 subpoena seeking the defendant’s true name and address and required the plaintiff to attach a copy of the order. The plaintiff may also serve a similar subpoena on another internet service provider identified in response to the first subpoena.
If AT&T Internet qualifies as a cable operator under the cited federal statute, the provider must follow the statute’s notice requirement by sending the subscriber a copy of the order. More generally, the provider must serve the subscriber with copies of the subpoena and order within 30 days after the subpoena is served. Each subscriber and the provider has 30 days after service to file a motion contesting, quashing, or modifying the subpoena. If no subscriber contests the subpoena during that period, the provider has 10 additional days to produce the responsive information. The provider must preserve the subpoenaed information while production or any timely challenge remains unresolved.
Confidentiality and Use of Information
The defendant’s name and other identifying information must initially be filed under seal and otherwise kept undisclosed. The plaintiff may use information obtained through the subpoena only to protect and enforce the rights asserted in its complaint. After service on the defendant, the court may require the defendant to seek permission to proceed anonymously.
Disposition
Judge Lisa J. Cisneros issued the order allowing the requested third-party subpoena subject to these notice, challenge, preservation, use, and confidentiality conditions. The opinion does not decide the underlying allegations in Strike 3 Holdings’ complaint.
Read the full 3-page opinion on CourtListener, the free public archive maintained by the Free Law Project.