Court, Explained
U.S. Federal District Courts
←Back to docket
S.D.N.Y.Procedural orderFiled Oct. 28, 2025

Strike 3 Holdings v. John Doe subscriber assigned IP address 47.230.14.136

Judge
Philip Halpern
Docket
7:25-cv-08119
Court
U.S. District Court · Southern District of New York
Pages
2
DiscoveryCivil Procedure
In one sentence

In Strike 3 Holdings v. John Doe, Judge Halpern authorized early subpoenas to identify the subscriber linked to an IP address.

Who this affects

Strike 3 Holdings, LLC, John Doe, Spectrum, and any other internet service provider identified through the authorized subpoenas.

What happened

Strike 3 Holdings, LLC sued John Doe, identified in the case by the IP address 47.230.14.136, and asked to obtain identifying information before the parties’ required early case-management conference. It argued that there was good cause to serve a subpoena on Spectrum, the internet service provider identified in the order.

The court found good cause and authorized Strike 3 Holdings to serve Spectrum with a subpoena seeking the defendant’s true name and address. The court also authorized subpoenas to other internet service providers identified through that process.

Judge Philip M. Halpern ordered that any subpoena include a copy of the order and limited use of the information to protecting and enforcing Strike 3 Holdings’ rights described in its complaint. If Spectrum qualifies as a cable operator, it must notify the defendant by sending a copy of the order.

The detailed version

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

Case
Strike 3 Holdings v. John Doe subscriber assigned IP address 47.230.14.136 · No. 7:25-cv-08119
Judge
Philip Halpern
Date
Oct. 28, 2025

Background

Strike 3 Holdings, LLC asked for permission to serve a third-party subpoena before the parties held the conference required by Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 26(f). The proposed subpoena was directed to Spectrum, which the order calls the internet service provider, and sought the defendant’s true name and address associated with the IP address identified in the complaint.

Court’s ruling

The court found that Strike 3 Holdings had established “good cause” to serve the subpoena. It authorized Strike 3 Holdings to serve Spectrum with a subpoena under Rule 45, provided that Strike 3 Holdings attaches a copy of the order. The court also authorized Strike 3 Holdings to serve a similar subpoena on any internet service provider identified in response to a subpoena as providing internet services to one of the defendants.

The order further states that, if Spectrum qualifies as a “cable operator” under 47 U.S.C. § 522(5), it must comply with 47 U.S.C. § 551(c)(2)(B) by sending a copy of the order to the defendant. Strike 3 Holdings may use information obtained through the subpoena only to protect and enforce the rights described in its complaint. Judge Philip M. Halpern entered the order on October 27, 2025.

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.