Strike 3 Holdings, LLC v. Doe subscriber assigned IP address 98.61.44.53

Background

Strike 3 Holdings, LLC filed a copyright-infringement lawsuit against an unidentified subscriber associated with IP address 98.61.44.53. Strike 3 alleged that the subscriber used the BitTorrent file-distribution protocol to download and distribute Strike 3’s copyrighted movies. Strike 3 said its infringement-detection system identified the IP address but that the internet service provider was the only party able to connect the address to a person’s name and address.

Strike 3 asked for permission to serve a Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 45 subpoena on the internet service provider before the parties’ required Rule 26(f) conference. It sought limited, immediate discovery to identify the subscriber, investigate the alleged infringement, and serve the defendant.

The court addressed this motion together with 50 substantively similar motions filed in separate District of Minnesota cases. The opinion states that the complaints and supporting materials were nearly identical, except for details such as the IP address, internet service provider, and number of works allegedly infringed.

Legal standard

Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 26(d)(1) generally bars discovery before the parties confer as required by Rule 26(f), unless the rules, the parties’ agreement, or a court order permits it. The court explained that early discovery may be appropriate when a defendant’s identity is unknown. Courts in the district generally apply a “good cause” standard, which asks whether the need for early discovery, considering the administration of justice, outweighs prejudice to the responding party.

The court applied five factors: whether the plaintiff made a concrete initial showing of an actionable claim; whether the discovery request was specific; whether other ways existed to obtain the information; whether the information was needed to advance the claim; and the subscriber’s expectation of privacy.

Court’s analysis

The court found that expedited discovery was warranted. It concluded that Strike 3 had stated an actionable copyright claim by alleging ownership of copyrighted works, unauthorized copying and distribution by the defendant, and lack of authorization. The court found the request specific because it sought only the subscriber’s name and address. It also found no alternative means to obtain the information and concluded that the case could not proceed without identifying the defendant.

The court recognized that the subscriber might not be the actual infringer and that the case involved sensitive and potentially embarrassing subject matter. It nevertheless concluded that, with privacy protections, Strike 3’s right to use the judicial process outweighed the subscriber’s privacy expectation. The court’s finding that Strike 3 stated an actionable claim was made for purposes of deciding the discovery motion; the order did not finally determine that the subscriber committed infringement.

Order

For Case No. 25-cv-958, the court granted Strike 3’s ex parte motion for leave to serve a third-party subpoena before the Rule 26(f) conference. The subpoena may seek only the name and address of the subscriber assigned to the IP address identified in the complaint during the periods of the alleged infringement.

The subpoena must give at least 60 days’ notice before production is required and may request only one category of documents identifying the subscriber. The internet service provider may seek a protective order if it has a legitimate basis. Within 14 calendar days after receiving the subpoena, the provider must notify the subscriber. The subscriber then has 45 calendar days from the notice date to seek a protective order, file a responsive pleading, or do both.

Strike 3 must serve the order with the subpoena. No other discovery was authorized at that time. Strike 3 may not publicly disclose information produced in response to the subpoena until the subscriber has had an opportunity to ask to proceed anonymously and the court rules on that request. The order also required Strike 3 to file a status report in each of the 51 cases by June 6, 2025, without including information identifying any defendant.

Judge Dulce J. Foster signed the omnibus order.