Strike 3 Holdings, LLC v. John Doe subscriber assigned IP address 69.215.145.39
- Virginia Demarchi
- 5:20-cv-08351
- U.S. District Court · Northern District of California
- 2
In Strike 3 Holdings v. John Doe Subscriber, Judge Demarchi allowed a subpoena to identify the subscriber assigned the listed internet address.
Strike 3 Holdings, LLC may seek the identity and address of the subscriber associated with IP address 69.215.145.39. AT&T U-verse must notify the subscriber if it is served and may object or seek a protective order.
What happened
Strike 3 Holdings, LLC v. John Doe Subscriber Assigned IP Address 69.215.145.39 concerns Strike 3’s request to identify the defendant before formally serving the case. Strike 3 asked to subpoena AT&T U-verse before the parties’ required Rule 26(f) conference.
The court found good cause for the request. It concluded that Strike 3 had sufficiently identified a potentially suable defendant, described efforts to locate the defendant, shown that its case could survive a request for dismissal, and shown a reasonable chance of identifying the defendant through discovery. The court allowed Strike 3 to subpoena AT&T U-verse for the subscriber’s name and address.
Judge Virginia K. Demarchi granted the application. AT&T U-verse must notify the subscriber, may object or seek a protective order, and Strike 3 may use the information only to protect and enforce the rights described in its complaint. Strike 3 may not publicly disclose the subscriber’s identity without the subscriber’s consent or the court’s permission.
The detailed version
- Strike 3 Holdings, LLC v. John Doe subscriber assigned IP address 69.215.145.39 · No. 5:20-cv-08351
- Virginia Demarchi
- Dec. 10, 2020
Background
Strike 3 Holdings, LLC asked for permission to serve a subpoena on AT&T U-verse before the parties held the conference required by Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 26(f). The subpoena sought the true name and address of the subscriber to whom AT&T U-verse assigned IP address 69.215.145.39.
Court’s Analysis
The court found good cause for allowing this early discovery. Applying the factors described in the cited cases, the court found that Strike 3 had: (1) identified the defendant with enough specificity for the court to determine that the defendant was a real person or entity who could be sued in federal court; (2) identified steps previously taken to locate the defendant; (3) shown that its action could withstand a motion to dismiss; and (4) shown a reasonable likelihood that discovery would identify the defendant so service of process could occur.
The court also noted that, after Strike 3 learns the defendant’s identity, it cannot rely on a bare allegation that the defendant is the registered subscriber of an internet protocol address associated with infringing activity to state a plausible claim. At this stage, however, the court found that Strike 3 could use limited discovery to determine the defendant’s identity.
Order
The court granted Strike 3’s application. Strike 3 may serve AT&T U-verse with a Rule 45 subpoena seeking the subscriber’s true name and address, and must attach the order to the subpoena.
AT&T U-verse must serve the subscriber with a copy of the subpoena and the order within 30 days after the subpoena is served on AT&T U-verse. AT&T U-verse may use any reasonable method, including written notice sent by first-class mail or overnight service to the subscriber’s last known address.
Strike 3 may use information disclosed in response to the subpoena only to protect and enforce the rights described in its complaint. AT&T U-verse may object to the subpoena and may seek a protective order. If AT&T U-verse provides the subscriber’s identity, Strike 3 may not publicly disclose it without the subscriber’s consent or leave of court. Judge Virginia K. Demarchi signed the order as a United States Magistrate Judge.
Read the full 2-page opinion on CourtListener, the free public archive maintained by the Free Law Project.