Strike 3 Holdings, LLC v. Doe
- Philip Halpern
- 7:24-cv-06471
- U.S. District Court · Southern District of New York
- 2
In Strike 3 Holdings v. Doe, Judge Halpern allowed Strike 3 Holdings to subpoena Optimum Online for Doe’s identity before the Rule 26(f) conference.
Strike 3 Holdings, LLC may seek John Doe’s identifying information from Optimum Online and certain other identified internet service providers, subject to the order’s notice and use restrictions.
What happened
Strike 3 Holdings, LLC sued John Doe, identified as the subscriber assigned IP address 68.192.204.136, and asked to serve a subpoena before the parties’ required Rule 26(f) conference. The subpoena sought information from Optimum Online, identified as the internet service provider.
The court found that Strike 3 Holdings had shown good cause. It allowed the company to serve a subpoena requiring Optimum Online to provide Doe’s true name and address, and allowed similar subpoenas to other internet service providers identified in responses. The order required copies of the order to be sent to Doe in certain circumstances and limited use of the information to protecting and enforcing the rights described in the complaint.
Judge Philip M. Halpern issued the order on September 13, 2024. The court granted permission to serve the early third-party subpoena, but the opinion did not decide the underlying claims against John Doe.
The detailed version
- Strike 3 Holdings, LLC v. Doe · No. 7:24-cv-06471
- Philip Halpern
- Sept. 13, 2024
Background
Strike 3 Holdings, LLC asked for permission to serve a third-party subpoena before the parties held the conference required by Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 26(f). The defendant is identified as John Doe, the subscriber assigned Internet Protocol address 68.192.204.136. The proposed subpoena was directed to Optimum Online, which the order calls the internet service provider.
Court’s ruling
The court found that Strike 3 Holdings had established “good cause” to seek the information before the Rule 26(f) conference. It authorized Strike 3 Holdings to serve Optimum Online with a subpoena under Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 45 requiring the provider to disclose the true name and address of the defendant to whom it assigned the specified Internet Protocol address. A copy of the order must accompany the subpoena.
The order also authorized Strike 3 Holdings to serve the same type of subpoena on any other internet service provider identified in response to a subpoena as providing internet services to one of the defendants. If Optimum Online qualifies as a cable operator under 47 U.S.C. § 522(5), the order requires compliance with 47 U.S.C. § 551(c)(2)(B), including sending a copy of the order to the defendant so the subscriber is notified.
Strike 3 Holdings may use information disclosed in response to the subpoena only to protect and enforce the rights described in its complaint. Judge Philip M. Halpern entered the order on September 13, 2024. The opinion addresses early third-party discovery and does not decide the underlying claims.
Read the full 2-page opinion on CourtListener, the free public archive maintained by the Free Law Project.