Court, Explained
U.S. Federal District Courts
Back to docket
N.D. Cal.Procedural orderFiled Mar. 16, 2021

Strike 3 Holdings v. John Doe subscriber assigned IP address 99.162.144.107

Judge
Joseph Spero
Docket
3:21-cv-00304
Court
U.S. District Court · Northern District of California
Pages
2
Civil ProcedureDiscovery
In one sentence

In Strike 3 Holdings v. John Doe, Judge Spero allowed subpoenas seeking the subscriber’s identity and address for the copyright lawsuit.

Who this affects

Strike 3 Holdings, LLC, the unnamed subscriber assigned IP address 99.162.144.107, AT&T U-verse, and any other internet providers identified through the authorized subpoenas.

What happened

In Strike 3 Holdings, LLC v. John Doe Subscriber Assigned IP Address 99.162.144.107, Strike 3 asked to subpoena internet providers before the parties’ required early case conference. The court found good cause to allow the request.

The order permits Strike 3 to subpoena AT&T U-verse for the name and address of the person assigned the listed internet address. It also permits subpoenas to other internet providers identified in the responses. Providers must notify affected subscribers, who may challenge the subpoenas within 30 days.

Judge Spero ordered providers to preserve the requested information and allowed Strike 3 to use it only to protect its rights under the Copyright Act. Any identifying information must be filed under seal. The order did not decide whether anyone infringed copyright.

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 99.162.144.107 · No. 3:21-cv-00304
Judge
Joseph Spero
Date
Mar. 16, 2021

Background

Strike 3 Holdings, LLC sought permission to serve a third-party subpoena before the parties held the conference required by Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 26(f). The subpoena sought information identifying the subscriber assigned Internet Protocol address 99.162.144.107.

Ruling

The court granted the application and found that Strike 3 had shown “good cause” to serve a subpoena on AT&T U-verse. The order authorizes a Rule 45 subpoena requiring AT&T to provide Strike 3 with the defendant’s true name and address. It also permits Strike 3 to serve the same type of subpoena on any other internet service provider identified in response as providing internet service to the defendant.

The order treats the authorized subpoenas as court orders permitting disclosure under 47 U.S.C. § 551. Each provider has 30 days after service to give the affected subscriber a copy of the subpoena and the order. Each subscriber and provider then has 30 days after service to file a motion challenging the subpoena, including a motion to cancel or modify it. If no timely challenge is filed, the provider has 10 days to produce the responsive information for that subscriber.

Providers must preserve the requested information while waiting for production or resolution of a timely challenge. Strike 3 may use information disclosed in response to a subpoena only to protect its rights under the Copyright Act. Any name or other personal identifying information concerning a current or proposed defendant, or another subscriber identified through a subpoena, must be filed under seal and not otherwise disclosed. The order addressed discovery and disclosure procedures; it did not decide the merits of any copyright-infringement claim.

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.