Strike 3 Holdings v. John Doe subscriber assigned IP address 73.252.162.117
- Donna Ryu
- 4:21-cv-09093
- U.S. District Court · Northern District of California
- 3
In Strike 3 Holdings v. John Doe, Judge Ryu allowed Strike 3 to subpoena Comcast for the defendant’s identity before the required early case conference.
Strike 3 Holdings, LLC may seek the identity and address of the defendant from Comcast, while the subscriber and Comcast receive notice and an opportunity to challenge the subpoena.
What happened
Strike 3 Holdings, LLC sued John Doe, a subscriber associated with a specified internet address, and asked to subpoena Comcast before the parties held the conference normally required early in a federal case.
The court found good cause and allowed Strike 3 to serve Comcast with a subpoena seeking the defendant’s name and address. Strike 3 could also subpoena another internet provider identified in Comcast’s response.
The order required notice to the subscriber, allowed the subscriber or Comcast 30 days to challenge the subpoena, limited use of the information to enforcing the complaint’s claims, and required personal identifying information to be filed under seal. Judge Donna M. Ryu issued the order.
The detailed version
- Strike 3 Holdings v. John Doe subscriber assigned IP address 73.252.162.117 · No. 4:21-cv-09093
- Donna Ryu
- Dec. 17, 2021
Background
Strike 3 Holdings, LLC filed an application asking for permission to serve a third-party subpoena before the parties’ Rule 26(f) conference. The requested subpoena was directed to Comcast, identified in the order as the internet service provider, and sought the true name and address of the defendant associated with the internet address listed in the complaint.
Ruling
The court found that Strike 3 had shown “good cause” to serve the subpoena. It authorized Strike 3 to serve Comcast with a subpoena under Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 45, attaching a copy of the order. Strike 3 could also serve the same type of subpoena on another internet service provider identified in Comcast’s response as providing internet service to one of the defendants.
Notice and Limits
If Comcast qualified as a cable operator under the cited federal statute, it had to notify the subscriber by sending a copy of the order. Comcast also had to serve the subscriber with copies of the subpoena and order within 30 days after service. The subscriber and Comcast each had 30 days after service to file a motion contesting the subpoena, including a motion to quash or modify it. If no timely challenge was filed, Comcast would have 10 days to provide the responsive information to Strike 3.
The order required Comcast to preserve the subpoenaed information while a timely challenge was pending or until the information was delivered to Strike 3. Strike 3 could use information obtained through the subpoena only to protect and enforce the rights asserted in its complaint. Names and other identifying information of current or proposed defendants had to be filed under seal. The court also stated that it might require a defendant to seek permission to proceed anonymously if substantive motions were filed.
Read the full 3-page opinion on CourtListener, the free public archive maintained by the Free Law Project.