Strike 3 Holdings, LLC v. Doe
- Andrew Carter
- 1:24-cv-08169
- U.S. District Court · Southern District of New York
- 2
In Strike 3 Holdings, LLC v. Doe, Judge Carter received—but the text does not show him ruling on—the request for early discovery.
Strike 3 Holdings, LLC, the unidentified John Doe defendant, and Verizon Fios as the internet service provider from which Strike 3 seeks identifying information.
What happened
Strike 3 Holdings, LLC says an unidentified internet subscriber used BitTorrent to infringe its copyrights. The filing says the subscriber is known only by an Internet Protocol address, and that the Internet provider may have records identifying the subscriber.
Through its lawyer, Strike 3 asks for permission to seek a subpoena to Verizon Fios before the parties’ required discovery-planning conference. It also asks to delay, or not schedule, the initial case-management conference until the defendant is identified and served.
The document is a request from the plaintiff, not a court decision. It does not state that the court granted or denied either request. The document is addressed to Judge Andrew L. Carter, Jr., but the text does not show a ruling by him.
The detailed version
- Strike 3 Holdings, LLC v. Doe · No. 1:24-cv-08169
- Andrew Carter
- Dec. 2, 2024
Document and procedural posture
The provided document is a letter from Jacqueline M. James, counsel for Strike 3 Holdings, LLC. It asks the court for permission to file a motion seeking early discovery and asks to postpone the initial scheduling conference. The text does not include a separate judicial order or a disposition of those requests.
Background
Strike 3 alleges that the John Doe defendant directly infringed its copyrights by using the BitTorrent file-distribution network. According to the filing, Strike 3 knows the defendant only by an Internet Protocol address. Strike 3 says the defendant’s Internet service provider, Verizon Fios, maintains records that may identify the subscriber assigned that address, but that providers generally keep those records for only a short time.
Relief requested
Strike 3 asks for permission under Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 26(d)(1) to seek a third-party subpoena before the parties hold the required Rule 26(f) discovery-planning conference. The proposed discovery would be directed to Verizon Fios to obtain information identifying the Doe defendant. Strike 3 states that its anticipated motion would address factors courts commonly consider in these circumstances, including an initial showing of copyright infringement, a specific discovery request, the lack of another way to obtain the information, the importance of the requested information, and the defendant’s limited privacy interest in the alleged conduct.
Strike 3 also asks the court to adjourn any scheduled initial Rule 16 scheduling conference, or not schedule one, until the defendant is identified and served.
Ruling
No ruling is shown in the provided text. It does not say that Judge Andrew L. Carter, Jr. granted, denied, or otherwise decided either request.
Read the full 2-page opinion on CourtListener, the free public archive maintained by the Free Law Project.