Strike 3 Holdings, LLC v. John Doe subscriber assigned IP address 73.222.70.179

Background

Strike 3 Holdings, LLC said it produces copyrighted pornographic videos that are often distributed online through file-sharing protocols such as BitTorrent. Using specialized software, Strike 3 identified an Internet Protocol address that it said was used to distribute 24 of its films without authorization.

Strike 3 sued an unknown defendant on June 30, 2025. It alleged that Comcast Cable Communications, LLC was the internet service provider associated with the address and that Comcast could identify the account holder. Strike 3 said it had tried other methods of identifying the person without success and that internet service providers routinely delete this information after a certain time.

Strike 3 therefore asked for permission to serve Comcast with a Rule 45 subpoena before the parties’ required Rule 26(f) conference. A subpoena is a legal demand for information from a person or entity that is not a party to the lawsuit. Strike 3 said it had policies of entering confidentiality agreements and not seeking settlements unless a defendant initiated settlement discussions.

Legal standard

Under Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 26(d), a court may allow discovery before the Rule 26(f) conference when there is good cause. Courts generally weigh the need for expedited discovery against possible prejudice to the responding party.

For early discovery aimed at identifying an unknown defendant, courts consider whether the plaintiff has: (1) identified the unknown defendant specifically enough for the court to determine that the person can be sued in federal court; (2) described efforts to locate and identify the person; (3) shown that the complaint could withstand a motion to dismiss; and (4) shown that the requested discovery is reasonably likely to produce information allowing service of process.

Court’s analysis

The court discussed concerns raised in other cases about Strike 3’s litigation practices, including allegations that its lawsuits can pressure account owners to settle because of the subject matter and the cost of defending a copyright case. The court nevertheless concluded that Strike 3 was entitled to the same copyright protections as other content publishers.

The court found that Strike 3 needed the subpoena to identify the defendant, had satisfied the applicable requirements for early discovery, and had shown good cause. The court stated that denying leave for the subpoena would be an abuse of discretion under the cited Ninth Circuit authority.

The court separately considered protections for the possibly innocent account holder. It found that Strike 3’s stated policies did not fully address the risk of prejudice because the subscriber might not know that anonymity could be requested. The court therefore required Strike 3 to attempt to ensure that the defendant learned as early as possible that the defendant could proceed anonymously.

Ruling

Judge Richard Seeborg granted Strike 3’s request for leave to serve a third-party subpoena on Comcast. The subpoena may seek the true name and address of the person to whom Comcast assigned the listed internet address. Strike 3 may also serve the same type of subpoena on another internet service provider identified in Comcast’s response.

The order requires Strike 3 to attach the order to the subpoena and requires Comcast to send a copy of the order to the subscriber if the applicable federal cable-privacy provision applies. Regardless of whether that provision applies, Strike 3 must request that Comcast forward the order to the subscriber. If Comcast declines, Strike 3 must serve the order on the defendant no later than its first other service or communication with the defendant.

Strike 3 may use information obtained from the subpoena only to protect and enforce the rights asserted in its complaint. It may not publicly disclose the information without the court’s permission at least until the defendant has had an opportunity to request anonymity or further discovery has occurred. References to the defendant’s identity must be redacted and filed under seal until further notice. The receiving internet service provider must also preserve subpoenaed information while any timely motion to dismiss is pending.