Strike 3 Holdings, LLC v. Doe
- Louis Stanton
- 1:24-cv-03212
- U.S. District Court · Southern District of New York
- 2
In Strike 3 Holdings v. Doe, Judge Stanton allowed early subpoenas seeking the defendant’s identifying information from Verizon Fios and other providers.
Strike 3 Holdings, LLC may seek John Doe’s identifying information from Verizon Fios and potentially other internet-service providers. John Doe may receive notice if the cable-operator notice provision applies.
What happened
Strike 3 Holdings, LLC sued John Doe, identified as the subscriber assigned IP address 96.248.39.216. Before the usual discovery conference, Strike 3 asked to subpoena Verizon Fios for information identifying the defendant.
The court found that Strike 3 had shown good cause for early discovery. It allowed Strike 3 to serve a subpoena requiring Verizon Fios to provide the defendant’s true name and address, and allowed similar subpoenas to other internet-service providers identified in response. The order also required notice to the defendant if Verizon Fios is a cable operator and limited use of the information to protecting and enforcing Strike 3’s rights in the complaint.
Judge Louis Stanton granted Strike 3’s motion for leave to serve the third-party subpoenas before a Rule 26(f) conference. The order did not decide the underlying claims.
The detailed version
- Strike 3 Holdings, LLC v. Doe · No. 1:24-cv-03212
- Louis Stanton
- May 29, 2024
Background
Strike 3 Holdings, LLC sued John Doe, described in the caption as the subscriber assigned IP address 96.248.39.216. Strike 3 moved for permission to serve a third-party subpoena before the parties held the discovery conference ordinarily required by Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 26(f).
Court’s analysis
The court found that Strike 3 had established “good cause” for early discovery. The opinion cited Second Circuit and Southern District of New York decisions addressing early subpoenas to identify an unknown defendant.
Order
The court granted Strike 3 permission to serve Verizon Fios with a Rule 45 subpoena requiring it to provide the defendant’s true name and address. Strike 3 must attach a copy of the order to the subpoena.
The court also allowed Strike 3 to serve a similar Rule 45 subpoena on any service provider identified in response to a subpoena as providing internet services to one of the defendants.
If Verizon Fios qualifies as a “cable operator” under 47 U.S.C. § 522(5), it must comply with the notice requirement in 47 U.S.C. § 551(c)(2)(B) by sending the defendant a copy of the order. Strike 3 may use information obtained through the Verizon Fios subpoena only to protect and enforce its rights stated in the complaint.
Judge Louis Stanton’s order concerns discovery needed to identify the defendant. It does not decide the merits of Strike 3’s claims.
Read the full 2-page opinion on CourtListener, the free public archive maintained by the Free Law Project.