Strike 3 Holdings, LLC v. Doe
- Jed Rakoff
- 1:25-cv-01278
- U.S. District Court · Southern District of New York
- 2
In Strike 3 Holdings v. John Doe, Judge Rakoff allowed early subpoenas to identify the defendant through internet-service records.
Strike 3 Holdings, LLC, John Doe, Verizon Online LLC, and any other internet service provider identified through the subpoena process.
What happened
Strike 3 Holdings, LLC asked to serve a subpoena before the parties held their initial required conference. The subpoena sought the name and address of the person assigned the listed internet address.
The court found that Strike 3 had shown good cause to obtain this information from Verizon Online LLC. The order also allowed subpoenas to other internet providers identified through the subpoena process.
Judge Rakoff granted the request and required Verizon to provide the information within 21 days. Strike 3 may use the information only to protect and enforce the rights described in its complaint, and Verizon must notify John Doe if federal cable-privacy law requires that notice.
The detailed version
- Strike 3 Holdings, LLC v. Doe · No. 1:25-cv-01278
- Jed Rakoff
- Mar. 7, 2025
Background
Strike 3 Holdings, LLC moved for permission to serve a third-party subpoena before the parties’ required conference under Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 26(f). The subpoena sought the true name and address of the defendant associated with the internet-protocol address 68.237.37.81. The proposed recipient was Verizon Online LLC, identified in the order as the internet service provider.
Court’s analysis
The court found that Strike 3 had established “good cause” to serve the subpoena before the Rule 26(f) conference. The order cited Second Circuit and Southern District of New York decisions concerning early subpoenas seeking identifying information about an unknown defendant.
Ruling
The court granted Strike 3 permission to serve Verizon with a subpoena under Rule 45. Strike 3 must attach a copy of the order to the subpoena. The court also authorized Strike 3 to serve the same type of subpoena on any service provider identified in response to a subpoena as providing internet services to one of the defendants.
Verizon must provide the requested information within 21 days of the order. If Verizon qualifies as a “cable operator” under 47 U.S.C. § 522(5), it must comply with the notice requirement in 47 U.S.C. § 551(c)(2)(B) by sending a copy of the order to John Doe. Strike 3 may use information obtained through the subpoena only to protect and enforce the rights stated in its complaint.
The order addressed early discovery and identification of the defendant. It did not decide the underlying claims in the complaint.
Read the full 2-page opinion on CourtListener, the free public archive maintained by the Free Law Project.