Strike 3 Holdings, LLC v. Doe
- Victor Marrero
- 1:24-cv-08171
- U.S. District Court · Southern District of New York
- 2
In Strike 3 Holdings v. Doe, Judge Victor Marrero allowed subpoenas seeking the defendant’s identity from Verizon Fios and other identified providers.
Strike 3 Holdings, LLC may seek identifying information about John Doe from Verizon Fios and, if identified, other internet service providers. John Doe is entitled to notice if Verizon Fios qualifies as a cable operator.
What happened
Strike 3 Holdings, LLC sued John Doe, a subscriber assigned the internet address 71.167.212.28, and asked to serve a subpoena before the parties held their required early case conference.
The court found that Strike 3 had shown a sufficient reason to seek the defendant’s name and address from Verizon Fios, the internet provider identified in the order. The order also allows subpoenas to other internet providers identified through those responses.
Judge Victor Marrero authorized the subpoenas and required a copy of the order to be attached. If Verizon Fios qualifies as a cable operator, it must notify the defendant by sending a copy of the order. Strike 3 may use information obtained through the subpoena only to protect and enforce the rights described in its complaint.
The detailed version
- Strike 3 Holdings, LLC v. Doe · No. 1:24-cv-08171
- Victor Marrero
- Nov. 19, 2024
Background
Strike 3 Holdings, LLC filed a motion for permission to serve a third-party subpoena before the parties’ conference required by Rule 26(f) of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure. The defendant is identified in the complaint as John Doe, a subscriber assigned internet protocol address 71.167.212.28. The proposed subpoena would be directed to Verizon Fios, identified as the internet service provider.
Court’s ruling
The court found that Strike 3 established “good cause” to serve the subpoena. The order authorizes Strike 3 to serve Verizon Fios with a Rule 45 subpoena seeking the defendant’s true name and address. Strike 3 must attach a copy of the order to the subpoena.
The order also permits 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), the order states that it may disclose the subscriber’s identifying information under 47 U.S.C. § 551(c)(2)(B) only pursuant to a court order authorizing disclosure and after the defendant is notified. The notification must be made by sending the defendant a copy of this order.
Limit on information use
Strike 3 may use information disclosed in response to the Rule 45 subpoena served on Verizon Fios only to protect and enforce the rights described in its complaint.
Read the full 2-page opinion on CourtListener, the free public archive maintained by the Free Law Project.