Strike 3 Holdings, LLC v. Doe
- Katherine Failla
- 1:25-cv-01276
- U.S. District Court · Southern District of New York
- 2
In Strike 3 Holdings v. Doe, Judge Failla allowed early subpoenas to identify the John Doe defendant through an internet provider.
Strike 3 Holdings, LLC may seek the John Doe defendant’s name and address from Verizon Fios and potentially other identified internet-service providers. The defendant must receive notice if the provider qualifies as a cable operator, and the disclosed information is restricted to use in protecting and enforcing the rights asserted in the complaint.
What happened
In Strike 3 Holdings, LLC v. Doe, Strike 3 Holdings asked to subpoena Verizon Fios before the parties held the conference normally required by Rule 26(f). The defendant was identified in the complaint as John Doe, the subscriber assigned a specified internet-protocol address.
The court found that Strike 3 Holdings had shown good cause. It allowed the company to serve Verizon Fios with a subpoena seeking the defendant’s true name and address, and allowed similar subpoenas to other internet-service providers identified through those responses. The information may be used only to protect and enforce the rights described in the complaint.
Judge Katherine Polk Failla also required notice to the defendant if the provider qualifies as a cable operator under federal law. The Clerk was directed to terminate the pending motion.
The detailed version
- Strike 3 Holdings, LLC v. Doe · No. 1:25-cv-01276
- Katherine Failla
- Mar. 26, 2025
Background
Strike 3 Holdings, LLC moved for permission to serve a third-party subpoena before the conference required by Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 26(f). The complaint identifies the defendant as John Doe, the subscriber assigned IP address 71.241.159.34. The proposed subpoena would be directed to Verizon Fios, identified in the order as the internet service provider.
Court’s Order
The court found that Strike 3 Holdings had established “good cause” to serve the subpoena before the Rule 26(f) conference. It therefore allowed Strike 3 Holdings to serve Verizon Fios with a subpoena under Rule 45 requiring Verizon Fios to provide the defendant’s true name and address. A copy of the order must accompany the subpoena.
The order also allows Strike 3 Holdings 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.
Notice and Use Restrictions
If Verizon Fios qualifies as a “cable operator” under 47 U.S.C. § 522(5), it must comply with 47 U.S.C. § 551(c)(2)(B) by sending the defendant a copy of the order. Strike 3 Holdings may use information disclosed in response to a subpoena served on Verizon Fios only to protect and enforce the rights described in the complaint.
The Clerk of Court was directed to terminate the pending motion at docket entry 7.
Read the full 2-page opinion on CourtListener, the free public archive maintained by the Free Law Project.