Court, Explained
U.S. Federal District Courts
←Back to docket
S.D.N.Y.Procedural orderFiled Apr. 8, 2025

Strike 3 Holdings, LLC v. Doe

Judge
Andrew Carter
Docket
1:25-cv-01284
Court
U.S. District Court · Southern District of New York
Pages
3
Civil ProcedureDiscovery
In one sentence

Strike 3 Holdings v. Doe: Judge Carter authorized a subpoena to identify the internet subscriber linked to a specified address, with notice and an opportunity to object.

Who this affects

Strike 3 Holdings, LLC, John Doe, the subscriber assigned internet address 65.78.19.69, and Astound Broadband/RCN, Inc. or another identified internet service provider.

What happened

Strike 3 Holdings, LLC v. John Doe concerns Strike 3’s request to obtain identifying information about the subscriber assigned the internet address 65.78.19.69.

The court found good cause to allow Strike 3 to serve Astound Broadband/RCN, Inc. with a subpoena seeking the subscriber’s true name and address, but not a telephone number or email address. The subscriber must receive notice and may ask the court to contest the subpoena, including by requesting to proceed anonymously.

Judge Andrew L. Carter, Jr. authorized the subpoena subject to these protections. The internet provider generally must wait 45 days for a challenge before producing information, and Strike 3 may use any information disclosed only to litigate this case.

The detailed version

For law students, journalists, and other readers who want the full reasoning

Case
Strike 3 Holdings, LLC v. Doe · No. 1:25-cv-01284
Judge
Andrew Carter
Date
Apr. 8, 2025

Background

Strike 3 Holdings, LLC asked for permission to serve a third-party subpoena before the parties’ required conference under Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 26(f). A subpoena is a formal demand for information from a person or organization that is not a party to the lawsuit. The subpoena would be directed to Astound Broadband/RCN, Inc., identified as the internet service provider, to obtain information about the subscriber assigned the internet address 65.78.19.69.

Court’s Decision

The court found that Strike 3 had established “good cause” for early discovery. It authorized Strike 3 to serve a subpoena under Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 45 seeking the subscriber’s true name and address, but not the subscriber’s telephone number or email address. Strike 3 must attach a copy of the order to the subpoena.

The order also permits Strike 3 to serve the same type of subpoena on another internet service provider identified in response to the first subpoena. Within 15 days after service, the provider must reasonably attempt to identify the John Doe defendant and give that subscriber a copy of the subpoena and the order. If the provider cannot identify the user of the internet address with reasonable technical certainty, it must notify Strike 3’s counsel in writing.

If the provider is a cable operator covered by federal law, it must send the subscriber a copy of the order as notice of the court-authorized disclosure. The subscriber has 45 days from service of the subpoena to file a motion contesting it, including a request to litigate anonymously. The provider may not disclose information to Strike 3 during that period. If no challenge is filed, the provider must produce the information needed to comply with the subpoena within 10 additional days.

The provider may also move to cancel the subpoena or otherwise object under Rule 45, while protecting the subscriber’s identity in its filings. If a challenge is filed, the provider must preserve the information and may not disclose it until the court resolves the challenge and orders disclosure. Strike 3 may use disclosed information only to litigate this case. The Clerk was directed to terminate the motion at ECF No. 8.

The authoritative version

Read the full 3-page opinion on CourtListener, the free public archive maintained by the Free Law Project.

Open opinion PDF →
Summary written with AI assistance. See how summaries are made. Spot something wrong? Tell us.