Court, Explained
U.S. Federal District Courts
←Back to docket
S.D.N.Y.Procedural orderFiled Sept. 18, 2024

Strike 3 Holdings, LLC v. Doe

Judge
Nelson Roman
Docket
7:24-cv-06472
Court
U.S. District Court · Southern District of New York
Pages
2
DiscoveryCivil Procedure
In one sentence

In Strike 3 Holdings v. Doe, Judge Roman allowed early subpoenas to identify the subscriber assigned to the listed internet address.

Who this affects

Strike 3 Holdings, LLC, John Doe—the subscriber assigned IP address 24.228.188.13—and Optimum Fiber or any other internet service provider responding to an authorized subpoena.

What happened

Strike 3 Holdings, LLC asked the court for permission to subpoena Optimum Fiber before the parties held their required initial case meeting. The defendant is identified in the caption as John Doe, the subscriber assigned IP address 24.228.188.13.

The court found that Strike 3 Holdings had shown good cause for the early subpoena. It authorized the company to ask Optimum Fiber for the defendant’s true name and address and to subpoena another internet provider identified in response to the first subpoena.

The information may be used only to protect and enforce Strike 3 Holdings’ rights described in its complaint. If Optimum Fiber qualifies as a cable operator, it must notify the defendant by sending a copy of the order. Judge Nelson S. Roman ordered the clerk to terminate the motion.

The detailed version

For law students, journalists, and other readers who want the full reasoning

Case
Strike 3 Holdings, LLC v. Doe · No. 7:24-cv-06472
Judge
Nelson Roman
Date
Sept. 18, 2024

Background

Strike 3 Holdings, LLC asked for permission to serve a third-party subpoena before the parties’ required Rule 26(f) conference. The defendant is captioned as John Doe, a subscriber assigned IP address 24.228.188.13. The proposed subpoena was directed to Optimum Fiber, identified as the internet service provider.

Court’s Analysis

The court found that Strike 3 Holdings had established “good cause” for serving the subpoena before the Rule 26(f) conference. A subpoena is a formal demand for information from a person or organization that is not a party to the lawsuit. The court relied on decisions from the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit and the Southern District of New York recognizing good cause for this type of request.

Order

The court authorized Strike 3 Holdings to serve Optimum Fiber with a subpoena under Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 45 seeking the defendant’s true name and address. The company must attach a copy of the order to the subpoena. The court also authorized a similar subpoena to any other internet service provider identified in response to a subpoena as providing internet services to one of the defendants.

If Optimum Fiber qualifies as a cable operator under federal law, it must comply with the law governing disclosure of subscriber information by sending the defendant a copy of the order. Strike 3 Holdings may use information obtained through the subpoena only to protect and enforce the rights described in its complaint. Judge Nelson S. Roman ordered the clerk to terminate the motion at docket entry 8.

The authoritative version

Read the full 2-page opinion on CourtListener, the free public archive maintained by the Free Law Project.

Open opinion PDF →
Summary written with AI assistance. See how summaries are made. Spot something wrong? Tell us.