Court, Explained
U.S. Federal District Courts
←Back to docket
S.D.N.Y.OtherFiled Sept. 22, 2025

Strike 3 Holdings v. Doe

Judge
P. Castel
Docket
1:25-cv-07400
Court
U.S. District Court · Southern District of New York
Pages
2
Intellectual PropertyCivil ProcedureDiscovery
In one sentence

In Strike 3 Holdings v. John Doe, Judge Castel was asked to allow early discovery to identify the defendant.

Who this affects

Strike 3 Holdings, LLC seeks to identify and serve John Doe through information allegedly held by Verizon Fios. The text does not show any ruling affecting those parties.

What happened

Strike 3 Holdings, LLC sued an unidentified Internet subscriber, called John Doe, alleging that the subscriber used BitTorrent to infringe its copyrights. The filing says the plaintiff knows the subscriber only through an Internet Protocol address.

Strike 3 asks for permission to seek a subpoena to Verizon Fios before the parties’ required discovery-planning meeting. The subpoena would seek information identifying the subscriber. Strike 3 also asks to delay any initial scheduling conference until the defendant is identified and served.

The filing is addressed to Judge P. Kevin Castel, but the provided text does not show that Judge Castel issued a ruling. It therefore records a request, not a decision granting or denying that request.

The detailed version

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

Case
Strike 3 Holdings v. Doe · No. 1:25-cv-07400
Judge
P. Castel
Date
Sept. 22, 2025

Nature of the Filing

The provided text is a letter from Jacqueline M. James, counsel for Strike 3 Holdings, LLC. It is a request for permission to file a motion seeking early discovery; it is not a judicial opinion or order, and the text does not state that the court ruled on the request.

Background

Strike 3 alleges that John Doe directly infringed its copyrights by using the BitTorrent file-distribution network. According to the filing, Strike 3 knows the defendant only by an Internet Protocol address. The filing identifies Verizon Fios as the Internet service provider that may have records connecting that address to a subscriber’s identity.

Requested Relief

Strike 3 asks for permission under Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 26(d)(1) to seek a third-party subpoena before the Rule 26(f) conference. The requested discovery would be directed to Verizon Fios and would seek information identifying John Doe. Strike 3 also asks the court to adjourn any initial Rule 16 scheduling conference, or not schedule one, until the defendant is identified and served.

Legal Standard Cited

The filing states that courts may permit discovery before the Rule 26(f) conference for good cause. It cites a five-factor approach used in Internet copyright cases: a preliminary showing of copyright infringement, a specific discovery request, no alternative way to obtain the information, a central need for the information, and a minimal expectation of privacy by the defendant. Strike 3 says it will address those factors in a later motion.

Status

The provided text contains no ruling by Judge P. Kevin Castel. It does not say that the request was granted, denied, or otherwise resolved.

The authoritative version

Read the full 2-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.