Strike 3 Holdings, LLC v. John Doe subscriber assigned IP address 71.146.128.11
- Virginia Demarchi
- 5:24-cv-07609
- U.S. District Court · Northern District of California
- 3
In Strike 3 Holdings v. John Doe, Judge DeMarchi allowed an early subpoena to identify the internet subscriber linked to an IP address.
Strike 3 Holdings, LLC may seek the unidentified subscriber’s name and address from AT&T Internet. The subscriber is entitled to notice and may be affected by any objection or request for a protective order. AT&T Internet must respond as specified in the order.
What happened
Strike 3 Holdings, LLC sued an unidentified subscriber associated with Internet Protocol address 71.146.128.11 and asked to serve a subpoena on AT&T Internet before the parties’ required conference.
The court found good cause for the early discovery, including a reasonable likelihood that AT&T’s records could identify the defendant. The court also noted that merely being the subscriber assigned an IP address does not, by itself, establish a plausible copyright-infringement claim.
Judge Virginia K. DeMarchi granted Strike 3’s request. Strike 3 may subpoena AT&T for the subscriber’s true name and address, but AT&T must notify the subscriber, may object or seek a protective order, and Strike 3 may not publicly disclose identifying information without the subscriber’s consent or court permission.
The detailed version
- Strike 3 Holdings, LLC v. John Doe subscriber assigned IP address 71.146.128.11 · No. 5:24-cv-07609
- Virginia Demarchi
- Nov. 18, 2024
Background
Strike 3 Holdings, LLC asked for permission to serve a third-party subpoena on AT&T Internet before the parties held the conference required by Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 26(f). AT&T Internet was identified as the internet service provider for the subscriber assigned Internet Protocol address 71.146.128.11.
Court’s Analysis
The court found good cause for early discovery under the standards discussed in Gillespie v. Civiletti and Columbia Insurance Co. v. Seescandy.com. The court found that Strike 3 had identified the defendant with enough specificity for the court to determine that the defendant could be sued in federal court, described prior efforts to locate the defendant, showed that its action could withstand a motion to dismiss, and established a reasonable likelihood that discovery could identify the defendant so service of process would be possible. The court also stated that Strike 3’s application indicated compliance with the copyright-registration requirements under 17 U.S.C. § 411(a).
The court cautioned that a bare allegation that someone is the registered subscriber assigned an IP address associated with infringing activity is not enough, by itself, to state a plausible claim for direct or contributory copyright infringement. Nevertheless, based on the record at this stage, the court concluded that Strike 3 could use limited discovery to determine the defendant’s identity.
Ruling and Conditions
The court granted Strike 3’s application and ordered that:
- Strike 3 may serve AT&T Internet with a Rule 45 subpoena seeking the true name and address of the subscriber assigned IP address 71.146.128.11. Strike 3 must attach the order to the subpoena. - AT&T Internet must serve the subscriber with copies of the subpoena and order within 30 days after the subpoena is served on AT&T Internet. - Strike 3 may use information produced in response to the subpoena only to protect and enforce the rights described in its complaint. - AT&T Internet may object to the subpoena and may seek a protective order. - If AT&T provides identifying information, Strike 3 may not publicly disclose it without the subscriber’s consent or permission from the court.
The order authorized discovery to identify the defendant; it did not decide whether the unidentified subscriber infringed copyright.
Read the full 3-page opinion on CourtListener, the free public archive maintained by the Free Law Project.