Strike 3 Holdings, LLC v. Doe

Background

Strike 3 Holdings, LLC sued an unidentified defendant, referred to as John Doe, for alleged copyright infringement. Strike 3 stated that the defendant’s internet protocol address had allegedly been used to infringe its copyrighted works through the BitTorrent file-distribution network. Strike 3 said it knew only the internet protocol address and that the defendant’s internet service provider, Spectrum, could use its records to identify the subscriber associated with that address.

Application

Strike 3 asked for permission under Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 26(d)(1) to file a motion seeking a third-party subpoena before the parties held the required discovery conference under Rule 26(f). The requested subpoena would seek information from Spectrum to identify the defendant. Strike 3 also requested that any initial scheduling conference under Rule 16 be postponed until the defendant was identified and served.

The letter argued that early discovery should be allowed because Strike 3 would show a preliminary copyright-infringement claim, make a specific request, lack another way to obtain the identifying information, need that information to proceed, and face a defendant with only a limited expectation of privacy in the relevant internet records.

Ruling

Judge Katherine Polk Failla granted the application. The court permitted Strike 3 to file a motion seeking permission to serve the third-party subpoena under Rule 26(d)(1), and ordered Strike 3 to file that motion by November 4, 2024. The court also postponed any initial Rule 16 scheduling conference until the defendant is named and served. The clerk was directed to terminate the pending motion at docket entry 6.

The order allowed Strike 3 to seek permission for early discovery; it did not itself authorize service of the subpoena or decide whether the alleged copyright infringement occurred.