Court, Explained
U.S. Federal District Courts
Back to docket
N.D. Cal.Procedural orderFiled June 12, 2025

Strike 3 Holdings, LLC v. John Doe subscriber assigned IP address 50.235.81.254

Judge
Edward Chen
Docket
3:25-cv-03893
Court
U.S. District Court · Northern District of California
Pages
3
Intellectual PropertyDiscoveryCivil Procedure
In one sentence

In Strike 3 Holdings v. John Doe, Judge Chen granted early discovery allowing a subpoena to identify the subscriber linked to the listed internet address.

Who this affects

Strike 3 may subpoena Comcast Cable for the name and address of the subscriber assigned the listed internet protocol address. John Doe is entitled to notice and confidentiality protections, and Comcast must preserve subpoenaed information if a timely motion to dismiss is filed.

What happened

In Strike 3 Holdings, LLC v. John Doe subscriber assigned IP address 50.235.81.254, Strike 3 alleged that John Doe used BitTorrent to infringe 30 of its adult motion pictures. Strike 3 asked to subpoena Comcast Cable before the parties’ required initial conference to learn John Doe’s name and address.

The court granted Strike 3’s request. It authorized a subpoena seeking the subscriber’s true name and address, required notice to the subscriber, and limited how Strike 3 could use and disclose the information. Comcast also had to preserve the subpoenaed information if John Doe filed a timely motion to dismiss.

Judge Edward Chen emphasized that the order did not decide whether John Doe infringed copyright or prevent John Doe from filing a motion to dismiss. Strike 3 must also consider whether to continue the lawsuit after identifying the subscriber.

The detailed version

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

Case
Strike 3 Holdings, LLC v. John Doe subscriber assigned IP address 50.235.81.254 · No. 3:25-cv-03893
Judge
Edward Chen
Date
June 12, 2025

Background

Strike 3 Holdings, LLC sued John Doe subscriber assigned IP address 50.235.81.254 for copyright infringement. Strike 3 alleged that John Doe infringed 30 of Strike 3’s adult motion pictures using the BitTorrent protocol. Because John Doe’s name and address were not identified, Strike 3 filed an ex parte application—an application made without advance notice to the opposing party—for permission to serve a third-party subpoena before the parties’ required Rule 26(f) conference.

The requested subpoena would be served on Comcast Cable, identified in the order as the internet service provider, and would seek the true name and address of the subscriber assigned the internet protocol address listed in Exhibit A to the complaint.

Ruling

The court found that Strike 3 had sufficiently shown good cause for the early discovery. It granted Strike 3’s motion and authorized service of a Rule 45 subpoena on Comcast Cable. The subpoena must include a copy of the order and a copy of the judge’s referenced prior decision.

If Comcast qualifies as a cable operator under 47 U.S.C. § 522(5), it must send John Doe a copy of the order as required by 47 U.S.C. § 551(c)(2)(B). Strike 3 must also ask Comcast to forward the order to the subscriber regardless of whether Comcast qualifies as a cable operator. If Comcast declines, Strike 3 must serve the order on John Doe at the same time as, or before, any other service or communication with John Doe. Strike 3 must file proof of its request or an affidavit stating that Comcast forwarded the order before Strike 3 attempts to serve or communicate with John Doe.

Limits on the Information and Further Proceedings

Strike 3 may use information obtained through the subpoena only to protect and enforce the rights asserted in its complaint. Without court permission, Strike 3 may not publicly disclose the information at least until John Doe has had an opportunity to seek permission to proceed anonymously or further discovery has occurred. References to John Doe’s identity must be redacted and filed under seal until further notice.

Before proceeding, Strike 3 must file an affidavit confirming that it proposed confidentiality to John Doe, along with relevant communications concerning any proposed confidentiality agreement. Comcast, and any other internet service provider receiving a subpoena under the order, must preserve subpoenaed information while any timely motion to dismiss is being resolved.

Judge Edward Chen stated that authorizing early discovery did not prevent John Doe from filing a motion to dismiss under Rule 12(b)(6), which challenges whether the complaint adequately states a claim, and did not prejudge such a motion. The court also reminded Strike 3 that, after learning John Doe’s name and address, it has an obligation under Rule 11 to determine whether to continue the lawsuit. The order addressed discovery and did not decide the underlying copyright-infringement allegations.

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.