Strike 3 Holdings v. John Doe subscriber assigned IP address 107.209.17.154
- Virginia Demarchi
- 5:25-cv-05453
- U.S. District Court · Northern District of California
- 2
In Strike 3 Holdings v. John Doe, Magistrate Judge DeMarchi allowed a subpoena seeking the subscriber’s identity from AT&T.
Strike 3 Holdings, LLC may subpoena AT&T Internet for the name and address of the subscriber associated with IP address 107.209.17.154. AT&T must notify the subscriber and may object or seek a protective order. The order does not decide whether John Doe infringed copyright.
What happened
Strike 3 Holdings, LLC sued John Doe subscriber assigned IP address 107.209.17.154 and asked to subpoena AT&T Internet before the parties’ required scheduling conference. Strike 3 said the subpoena could help identify the person connected to the internet address.
The court found good cause for early discovery because Strike 3 identified the defendant sufficiently, described efforts to locate the defendant, showed its lawsuit could survive a request for dismissal, and showed a reasonable chance that AT&T could identify the subscriber. The court also noted that merely being the subscriber for an IP address allegedly linked to infringement would not by itself establish a copyright claim, but allowed limited discovery to determine the subscriber’s identity.
Judge Virginia K. DeMarchi granted Strike 3’s application. Strike 3 may serve AT&T with a subpoena for the subscriber’s true name and address, subject to notice, objection, confidentiality, and other limits stated in the order.
The detailed version
- Strike 3 Holdings v. John Doe subscriber assigned IP address 107.209.17.154 · No. 5:25-cv-05453
- Virginia Demarchi
- July 28, 2025
Background
Strike 3 Holdings, LLC asked for permission to serve a Rule 45 subpoena on AT&T Internet before the parties held the conference ordinarily required by Rule 26(f). AT&T was identified as the internet service provider for the subscriber associated with IP address 107.209.17.154.
Court’s analysis
The court found good cause for early third-party discovery. It determined that Strike 3 had identified the defendant with enough specificity for the court to determine that the defendant was a real person or entity that could be sued in federal court; identified steps it had already taken to locate the defendant; shown that its action could withstand a motion to dismiss; and shown a reasonable likelihood that discovery could identify the defendant so service of process would be possible. The court also stated that Strike 3 had satisfied the copyright-registration requirements under 17 U.S.C. § 411(a).
The court distinguished between identifying a possible defendant and proving copyright infringement. It stated that a bare allegation that someone is the registered subscriber of an IP address associated with infringing activity is not enough, by itself, to state a plausible claim for direct or contributory copyright infringement. Nevertheless, on the record presented, the court concluded that Strike 3 could serve limited discovery to determine the defendant’s identity.
Ruling and conditions
Judge Virginia K. DeMarchi granted Strike 3’s application. Strike 3 may serve AT&T with a Rule 45 subpoena requiring AT&T to provide the true name and address of the subscriber to whom AT&T assigned IP address 107.209.17.154, and Strike 3 must attach the order to the subpoena.
AT&T must serve the subscriber with copies of the subpoena and order within 30 days after the subpoena is served on AT&T. AT&T may use any reasonable method, including first-class mail or overnight service to the subscriber’s last known address. Strike 3 may use information obtained from the subpoena only to protect and enforce the rights stated in its complaint. AT&T may object to the subpoena or seek a protective order. If AT&T provides identifying information, Strike 3 may not publicly disclose it without the subscriber’s consent or the court’s permission.
Read the full 2-page opinion on CourtListener, the free public archive maintained by the Free Law Project.