Strike 3 Holdings, LLC v. Doe
- Philip Halpern
- 7:25-cv-03231
- U.S. District Court · Southern District of New York
- 2
In Strike 3 Holdings v. Doe, Judge Halpern authorized early subpoenas to identify the defendant from an Internet address.
Strike 3 Holdings, LLC, John Doe, Verizon Fios, and any other Internet service provider identified in response to a subpoena.
What happened
Strike 3 Holdings, LLC sued John Doe, identified by an Internet address, and asked to subpoena Verizon Fios before the parties held their required early case-planning conference.
The court found good cause and allowed Strike 3 to subpoena Verizon Fios for the defendant’s true name and address. Strike 3 may also subpoena another Internet service provider identified in response. The information may be used only to protect and enforce the rights described in the complaint.
Judge Philip M. Halpern also required Verizon Fios to send the defendant a copy of the order if federal cable-privacy law applies to it as a cable operator.
The detailed version
- Strike 3 Holdings, LLC v. Doe · No. 7:25-cv-03231
- Philip Halpern
- Apr. 28, 2025
Background
Strike 3 Holdings, LLC filed this case against “John Doe subscriber assigned IP address 71.247.225.13.” It moved for permission to serve a third-party subpoena before the parties’ conference required by Rule 26(f) of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure. The proposed subpoena would be served on Verizon Fios, identified in the order as the Internet service provider.
Court’s Analysis
The court found that Strike 3 established “good cause” to serve the subpoena early. The order did not provide additional factual analysis explaining that finding.
Ruling
The court authorized Strike 3 to serve Verizon Fios with a Rule 45 subpoena requiring it to provide the true name and address of the defendant to whom Verizon Fios assigned the Internet address listed in the complaint. 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.
If Verizon Fios qualifies as a “cable operator” under 47 U.S.C. § 522(5), the order states that it may disclose personal identifying information under 47 U.S.C. § 551(c)(2)(B) only pursuant to a court order authorizing disclosure and if the subscriber is notified. The order therefore requires Verizon Fios to send a copy of the order to the defendant in that circumstance. Strike 3 may use information disclosed in response to the subpoena only to protect and enforce the rights stated in its complaint. Judge Philip M. Halpern signed the order on April 28, 2025.
Read the full 2-page opinion on CourtListener, the free public archive maintained by the Free Law Project.