Court, Explained
U.S. Federal District Courts
Back to docket
N.D. Cal.Procedural orderFiled Nov. 30, 2020

Strike 3 Holdings, LLC v. John Doe subscriber assigned IP address 75.57.10.47

Judge
Kandis Westmore
Docket
4:20-cv-07481
Court
U.S. District Court · Northern District of California
Pages
3
DiscoveryCivil ProcedureIntellectual Property
In one sentence

In Strike 3 Holdings v. John Doe, Judge Westmore allowed early subpoenas to identify the internet subscriber linked to the listed IP address.

Who this affects

Strike 3 Holdings, the unidentified subscriber associated with IP address 75.57.10.47, AT&T U-verse, and any other internet service providers identified through the authorized subpoenas.

What happened

Strike 3 Holdings, LLC sued a defendant identified only as John Doe subscriber assigned IP address 75.57.10.47. Strike 3 asked to issue a subpoena before the parties held their required initial conference.

The court found good cause to allow the request. It authorized Strike 3 to subpoena AT&T U-verse for the defendant’s true name and address, and to subpoena other internet providers identified through that process.

Judge Kandis Westmore ordered notice to subscribers, gave subscribers and providers 30 days to challenge a subpoena, required providers to preserve the information, limited its use to protecting Strike 3’s rights under the Copyright Act, and required filings containing identifying information to be sealed.

The detailed version

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

Case
Strike 3 Holdings, LLC v. John Doe subscriber assigned IP address 75.57.10.47 · No. 4:20-cv-07481
Judge
Kandis Westmore
Date
Nov. 30, 2020

Background

Strike 3 Holdings, LLC moved for permission to serve a third-party subpoena before the parties’ required Rule 26(f) conference. The defendant was identified in the caption as “John Doe Subscriber Assigned IP Address 75.57.10.47.” The opinion authorized discovery directed to internet service providers, but it did not provide additional facts about the underlying copyright allegations.

Ruling

The court found that Strike 3 had shown good cause to serve a Rule 45 subpoena on AT&T U-verse, identified as the initial internet service provider. The subpoena may seek only the defendant’s true name and address associated with IP address 75.57.10.47. The court also authorized subpoenas to any other internet service provider identified in response as providing internet service to the defendant.

The order treated the authorized subpoenas as court orders permitting disclosure under 47 U.S.C. § 551(c)(2)(B). Each provider must notify each affected subscriber within 30 days after service, using a reasonable method such as first-class mail or overnight delivery. Each subscriber and provider has 30 days after service to file a motion challenging the subpoena, including a motion to quash or modify it. If no timely challenge is filed, the provider has 10 days to produce the responsive information. Providers must preserve the information while awaiting production or resolution of a timely challenge.

The order limited any disclosed information to Strike 3’s use in protecting its rights under the Copyright Act. Documents containing a current or proposed defendant’s name or other identifying information must be filed under seal, following the court’s local sealing procedures. The court granted Strike 3’s ex parte motion for leave to serve the subpoenas before the Rule 26(f) conference.

The authoritative version

Read the full 3-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.