Strike 3 Holdings, LLC v. John Doe subscriber assigned IP address 76.132.253.35
- Virginia Demarchi
- 5:25-cv-05502
- U.S. District Court · Northern District of California
- 2
Counsel of record per CourtListener. Firm names are approximate.
In Strike 3 Holdings v. John Doe, Judge Demarchi allowed Strike 3 to subpoena Comcast for the subscriber’s identity linked to IP address 76.132.253.35.
Strike 3 Holdings, LLC may subpoena Comcast for the identity of the subscriber assigned IP address 76.132.253.35. Comcast must notify the subscriber and may object or seek a protective order; the subscriber’s identifying information is protected from public disclosure absent consent or court permission.
What happened
Strike 3 Holdings, LLC v. John Doe Subscriber Assigned IP Address 76.132.253.35 concerns Strike 3’s request to subpoena Comcast before the parties’ required initial conference. Strike 3 sought the name and address of the subscriber assigned the listed internet address.
The court found good cause because Strike 3 had sufficiently identified a potentially suable defendant, described its efforts to locate that person, showed that its claim could withstand dismissal, and showed a reasonable chance that discovery would identify the subscriber. The court also noted Strike 3’s compliance with copyright-registration requirements.
Judge Virginia K. DeMarchi granted Strike 3’s motion and allowed it to serve Comcast with a subpoena for the subscriber’s true name and address. Comcast must notify the subscriber, may object or seek a protective order, and may not disclose the subscriber’s identity publicly without consent or court permission.
The detailed version
- Strike 3 Holdings, LLC v. John Doe subscriber assigned IP address 76.132.253.35 · No. 5:25-cv-05502
- Virginia Demarchi
- July 28, 2025
Background
Strike 3 Holdings, LLC asked for permission to serve a third-party subpoena on Comcast Cable Communications, LLC before the parties held the conference required by Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 26(f). Comcast was identified as the internet service provider for the subscriber assigned IP address 76.132.253.35. Strike 3 sought the subscriber’s true name and address in connection with its copyright-infringement action against the unidentified subscriber.
Court’s Analysis
The court found good cause for early discovery. It determined that Strike 3 had: (1) identified the alleged defendant specifically enough for the court to determine that the person or entity could be sued in federal court; (2) described prior efforts to locate the defendant; (3) shown that its action could withstand a motion to dismiss; and (4) shown a reasonable likelihood that discovery would identify the defendant so service could occur.
The court also noted that Strike 3 had satisfied the copyright-registration requirements under 17 U.S.C. § 411(a). At the same time, the court recognized that merely alleging that someone is the subscriber assigned an IP address associated with infringing activity is not enough, by itself, to state a plausible claim for direct or contributory copyright infringement. The court nevertheless concluded that, at this stage and on the record presented, Strike 3 could obtain limited discovery to identify the potential defendant.
Ruling and Conditions
The court granted Strike 3’s application and ordered that:
- Strike 3 may serve Comcast with a Rule 45 subpoena requiring Comcast to provide the true name and address of the subscriber assigned IP address 76.132.253.35. Strike 3 must attach the order to the subpoena. - Comcast must serve the subscriber with copies of the subpoena and order within 30 days after the subpoena is served on Comcast. Comcast may use any reasonable method, including first-class mail or overnight service to the subscriber’s last known address. - Strike 3 may use information produced in response to the subpoena only to protect and enforce the rights described in its complaint. - Comcast may object to the subpoena or seek a protective order. - If Comcast gives Strike 3 information identifying the subscriber, Strike 3 may not publicly disclose that information without the subscriber’s consent or permission from the court.
Judge Virginia K. DeMarchi entered the order on July 28, 2025. The order addresses discovery needed to identify the subscriber; it does not decide whether the subscriber infringed copyright.
Read the full 2-page opinion on CourtListener, the free public archive maintained by the Free Law Project.