Strike 3 Holdings, LLC v. Doe
- Philip Halpern
- 7:24-cv-09961
- U.S. District Court · Southern District of New York
- 2
In Strike 3 Holdings v. Doe, Judge Halpern authorized subpoenas to identify the defendant linked to an internet address.
Strike 3 Holdings, LLC may seek identifying information about John Doe from Verizon Fios and other identified internet-service providers. John Doe may receive notice if the statutory cable-operator rule applies.
What happened
Strike 3 Holdings, LLC sued John Doe, identified in the caption by an internet address, and asked to subpoena Verizon Fios before the usual early case-planning conference. The opinion does not describe the underlying claim.
The court found good cause and allowed Strike 3 Holdings to subpoena Verizon Fios for the defendant’s true name and address. It also allowed subpoenas to other identified internet-service providers and limited use of the information to enforcing the rights asserted in the complaint.
Judge Philip M. Halpern issued the order on January 15, 2025. If Verizon Fios qualifies as a cable operator, the order requires notice to the defendant before personal identifying information is disclosed.
The detailed version
- Strike 3 Holdings, LLC v. Doe · No. 7:24-cv-09961
- Philip Halpern
- Jan. 15, 2025
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 subpoena would be directed to Verizon Fios, identified in the order as the internet-service provider, to determine the true name and address of the defendant associated with IP address 108.54.243.21. The opinion does not state the underlying legal claim.
Order
The court found that Strike 3 Holdings had shown “good cause” to obtain the information before the Rule 26(f) conference. It authorized Strike 3 Holdings to serve Verizon Fios with a subpoena under Rule 45, which governs subpoenas, and required that a copy of the order be attached. The order also authorized a similar subpoena to 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 requires it to comply with 47 U.S.C. § 551(c)(2)(B), including sending a copy of the order to the defendant so the defendant receives notice. Strike 3 Holdings may use information disclosed in response to the subpoena only to protect and enforce the rights asserted in its complaint.
Disposition
The order did not expressly use the word “granted” for the motion. It found good cause and authorized the requested pre-conference subpoenas, subject to the stated conditions. Judge Philip M. Halpern signed the order.
Read the full 2-page opinion on CourtListener, the free public archive maintained by the Free Law Project.