Strike 3 Holdings v. John Doe subscriber assigned IP address 100.2.102.7
- 1:25-cv-07398
- U.S. District Court · Southern District of New York
- 2
Strike 3 Holdings v. John Doe: the court allowed early subpoenas to identify the defendant, subject to limits on using the information.
Strike 3 Holdings, LLC, the unidentified John Doe defendant, Verizon Fios, and any other service provider responding to an authorized subpoena.
What happened
In Strike 3 Holdings, LLC v. John Doe subscriber assigned IP address 100.2.102.7, Strike 3 Holdings asked to subpoena Verizon Fios before the parties held their required early case conference. The defendant was identified only by the internet address assigned to the account.
The court found that Strike 3 Holdings had shown good cause to seek the defendant’s true name and address from Verizon Fios. The order also allowed subpoenas to other internet service providers identified through that process.
The court granted permission for the subpoenas and required additional protections for subscriber information. Judge information is not legible in the opinion, so the ruling is attributed to the court; any disclosed information may be used only to protect and enforce Strike 3 Holdings’ rights described in its complaint.
The detailed version
- Strike 3 Holdings v. John Doe subscriber assigned IP address 100.2.102.7 · No. 1:25-cv-07398
- Nov. 11, 2025
Background
Strike 3 Holdings, LLC filed this action against a defendant identified as “John Doe subscriber assigned IP address 100.2.102.7.” Strike 3 Holdings moved for permission to serve a subpoena before the parties’ conference required by Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 26(f). The requested subpoena was directed to Verizon Fios, identified as the internet service provider.
Court’s ruling
The court found that Strike 3 Holdings had established “good cause” to serve the subpoena before the Rule 26(f) conference. The court authorized Strike 3 Holdings to serve Verizon Fios with a subpoena under Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 45 requiring it to provide the defendant’s true name and address. A copy of the order must be attached to the subpoena.
The court also authorized Strike 3 Holdings to serve a similar subpoena on any service provider identified in response to a subpoena as providing internet services to one of the defendants. If Verizon Fios qualifies as a “cable operator” under 47 U.S.C. § 522(5), it must comply with the subscriber-notification requirement in 47 U.S.C. § 551(c)(2)(B) by sending a copy of the order to the defendant.
Limits on information use
The information disclosed in response to a subpoena served on Verizon Fios may be used only to protect and enforce Strike 3 Holdings’ rights described in its complaint. The signature and date in the reproduced opinion are not fully legible; the date above uses the supplied filing date, and no judge’s name can be determined from the text.
Read the full 2-page opinion on CourtListener, the free public archive maintained by the Free Law Project.