Strike 3 Holdings, LLC v. Doe
- Denise Cote
- 1:24-cv-09953
- U.S. District Court · Southern District of New York
- 3
In Strike 3 Holdings v. Doe, Plaintiff sought sealed filings; Judge Cote’s text records the request but does not state a ruling.
Strike 3 Holdings, LLC, the anonymized defendant identified in the caption, and members of the public who may seek access to the court filings.
What happened
In Strike 3 Holdings, LLC v. Doe, Strike 3 asked the court to let it file unredacted versions of its amended complaint, proposed summons, and return of service under seal. The documents would include the defendant’s name, address, and other identifying information.
Strike 3 said it had identified the subscriber assigned to an internet address after receiving information from the internet provider. It proposed keeping the identifying information sealed temporarily so the defendant could become a party and address privacy concerns before any public disclosure.
The provided text is a letter from Strike 3’s lawyer, not a ruling. Judge Denise L. Cote’s disposition of the request is not stated in the text.
The detailed version
- Strike 3 Holdings, LLC v. Doe · No. 1:24-cv-09953
- Denise Cote
- Aug. 15, 2025
Background
The provided document is a letter motion submitted by Jacqueline M. James on behalf of Strike 3 Holdings, LLC. The letter asks for permission to file unredacted versions of the First Amended Complaint, proposed summons, and return of service under seal. The caption identifies the defendant as “JOHN DOE subscriber assigned IP address 69.202.141.209.”
Strike 3 states that it owns adult motion pictures and recorded alleged infringing activity associated with the listed internet address through the BitTorrent network. The letter says the court had permitted Strike 3 to serve a subpoena on Spectrum, the internet service provider, to discover the identity of the subscriber assigned to that address. After receiving the subpoena response and conducting additional investigation, Strike 3 says it identified the subscriber and filed a First Amended Complaint.
Requested Relief
Strike 3 asks to continue using a pseudonym in the case caption while placing the defendant’s identifying information in sealed filings. It says the amended complaint contains the defendant’s name, address, and other factual information that Strike 3 considers central to its claim. Strike 3 proposes that the information remain sealed provisionally, allowing the defendant to be made a party and heard on privacy interests before the information is disclosed publicly.
The letter discusses the public’s presumptive right to access judicial documents and competing privacy considerations. It also proposes prohibiting Strike 3 from filing documents containing the defendant’s name or address on the public docket unless the court expressly authorizes it.
Disposition
The provided text does not contain a court order or state whether the request was granted, denied, or otherwise resolved. It therefore establishes only that Strike 3 requested permission to file the specified documents under seal. Judge Denise L. Cote’s ruling is not stated in the provided text.
Read the full 3-page opinion on CourtListener, the free public archive maintained by the Free Law Project.