Strike 3 Holdings, LLC v. Doe
- Rearden
- 1:25-cv-01270
- U.S. District Court · Southern District of New York
- 5
In Strike 3 Holdings v. John Doe, Judge Rearden granted Strike 3 permission to subpoena Verizon Fios for John Doe’s identity.
Strike 3 Holdings, LLC may seek John Doe’s identifying information from Verizon Fios. John Doe may challenge or seek limits on the subpoena and may request anonymity. Verizon Fios must preserve the information and follow the order’s notice and disclosure procedures.
What happened
In Strike 3 Holdings, LLC v. John Doe, Strike 3 alleged that copyrighted films were illegally downloaded or distributed using an internet connection associated with a specified Internet Protocol address. Strike 3 said it needed the subscriber’s identity to serve the lawsuit.
The court found that Strike 3 had shown a preliminary copyright-infringement claim, needed John Doe’s identity, and had no other way to learn it. The court also found good cause for safeguards because identifying the wrong subscriber could cause embarrassment, burden, or expense.
Judge Jennifer H. Rearden granted Strike 3’s motion to serve Verizon Fios with a subpoena before the parties’ required initial conference. The subpoena may seek John Doe’s true name and current and permanent address, but not email addresses or telephone numbers; the order also gives John Doe and Verizon Fios procedures for challenging or delaying disclosure.
The detailed version
- Strike 3 Holdings, LLC v. Doe · No. 1:25-cv-01270
- Rearden
- May 14, 2025
Background
Strike 3 Holdings, LLC asked for permission to serve a subpoena on Verizon Fios, an internet service provider, to identify the John Doe defendant associated with Internet Protocol address 96.250.179.185. The attached notice says Strike 3 claims that the defendant illegally downloaded or distributed copyrighted films. Strike 3 stated that it needed the defendant’s identity to serve the complaint and had no alternative way to determine it.
Court’s Analysis
The court found good cause to allow a third-party subpoena before the required conference under Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 26(f). It found that Strike 3 had established a preliminary claim of copyright infringement, needed John Doe’s identity to effect service, and lacked another means of identifying John Doe. The court also found good cause for a protective order because of the risk of false identification and the resulting annoyance, embarrassment, oppression, burden, or expense.
Order
The court granted Strike 3’s motion for leave to serve a third-party subpoena on Verizon Fios. The subpoena may seek John Doe’s true name and current and permanent address, but it may not seek email addresses or telephone numbers. Strike 3 must attach the order and the notice to the defendant to the subpoena.
Verizon Fios must serve John Doe with the subpoena, the order, and the notice within 60 days after receiving the subpoena. Under the order, John Doe has 30 days after service of the subpoena and order to file a motion challenging the subpoena, including a motion to quash or modify it, or to request permission to litigate anonymously. Verizon Fios may not disclose identifying information during that period or while a timely challenge is pending, unless the court later orders disclosure. If no challenge is filed during the 30-day period, Verizon Fios has 10 days to produce the responsive information.
The order requires Verizon Fios to preserve the subpoenaed information, confer with Strike 3 about production costs, and provide any information disclosed only for protecting Strike 3’s rights in the complaint. The Clerk was directed to terminate ECF No. 6.
Read the full 5-page opinion on CourtListener, the free public archive maintained by the Free Law Project.