Strike 3 Holdings, LLC v. John Doe Subscriber Assigned IP Address 73.241.203.2
- Joseph Spero
- 3:26-cv-07794
- U.S. District Court · Northern District of California
- 3
Counsel of record per CourtListener. Firm names are approximate.
In Strike 3 Holdings v. John Doe, Judge Spero authorized early subpoenas to identify the subscriber linked to an internet address.
Strike 3 Holdings, LLC may seek identification information from Comcast and other identified internet service providers. The unnamed defendant associated with IP address 73.241.203.2 and any other subscribers whose information is sought must receive notice and may challenge the subpoenas. The internet service providers must preserve the information and comply with the order’s production and confidentiality requirements.
What happened
Strike 3 Holdings, LLC asked to serve a subpoena before the parties held their required Rule 26(f) conference. The court found good cause to let Strike 3 subpoena Comcast Cable Communications, LLC for the true name and address of the person assigned IP address 73.241.203.2.
The order also allows subpoenas to other internet service providers identified through the subpoena process. The providers must notify affected subscribers and preserve the requested information. Subscribers and providers may challenge a subpoena within 30 days after service.
Judge Joseph C. Spero ordered that, if no timely challenge is filed, the provider must produce the responsive information within 10 days. Any disclosed information may be used only to protect Strike 3’s rights under the Copyright Act, and identifying information about any current or proposed defendant must be filed under seal and not otherwise disclosed.
The detailed version
- Strike 3 Holdings, LLC v. John Doe Subscriber Assigned IP Address 73.241.203.2 · No. 3:26-cv-07794
- Joseph Spero
- Aug. 10, 2026
Background
Strike 3 Holdings, LLC sought permission to serve a third-party subpoena before the Rule 26(f) conference. A Rule 26(f) conference is the early case-management conference generally held before formal discovery begins. The requested subpoena was directed to Comcast Cable Communications, LLC and sought the true name and address of the defendant associated with IP address 73.241.203.2.
Ruling
The court found that Strike 3 had established good cause for the early subpoena. The court authorized Strike 3 to serve Comcast with a subpoena under Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 45, requiring Comcast to provide the defendant’s true name and address. A copy of the order must accompany the subpoena.
The court also authorized Strike 3 to serve the same type of subpoena on any other internet service provider identified in response to a subpoena as providing internet service to the defendant. The order refers to Comcast and those other providers collectively as the internet service providers.
Notice and Challenges
The court stated that the authorized subpoenas qualify as court orders permitting disclosure under 47 U.S.C. § 551. Each internet service provider has 30 days after being served to give each affected subscriber a copy of the subpoena and this order, using any reasonable method, including first-class mail or overnight delivery to the subscriber’s last known address.
Each subscriber and internet service provider has 30 days after service on that person or entity to file a motion contesting the subpoena, including a motion to quash or modify it. If that period expires without a challenge, the provider has 10 days to produce the responsive information concerning that subscriber. The provider must preserve the subpoenaed information while awaiting production or the final resolution of a timely motion to quash.
Limits on Disclosure
Information produced in response to a subpoena may be used only to protect Strike 3’s rights under the Copyright Act, 17 U.S.C. § 101 and following provisions. Information identifying any current or proposed defendant must be filed under seal in court filings and may not otherwise be disclosed.
Disposition
The order authorizes Strike 3’s early third-party subpoena process and sets notice, challenge, preservation, production, and confidentiality requirements. It is a discovery order concerning identification of the defendant; the opinion does not decide copyright infringement or liability.
Read the full 3-page opinion on CourtListener, the free public archive maintained by the Free Law Project.
Related cases
- Concurrent Venturesv. Advanced Micro
- Thermaduct, LLC. v. Albers Mechanical Contractors, Inc. d/b/a Ducts and Cleats…Sep 2026
- Office Create Corporation v. COKeM International Ltd., Planet Entertainment LLC…Sep 2026
- Concurrent Venturesv. Advanced Micro
- Mattson Technologyv. Applied Materials
- Concurrent Venturesv. Advanced Micro