Strike 3 Holdings v. John Doe subscriber assigned IP address 23.116.232.165
- Virginia Demarchi
- 5:21-cv-09816
- U.S. District Court · Northern District of California
- 2
In Strike 3 Holdings v. John Doe, Judge Demarchi allowed Strike 3 to subpoena AT&T U-verse for the subscriber’s identity.
Strike 3 Holdings, LLC may seek the name and address of the subscriber assigned IP address 23.116.232.165 from AT&T U-verse. AT&T U-verse must notify the subscriber and may object to the subpoena or seek a protective order.
What happened
Strike 3 Holdings, LLC asked to serve AT&T U-verse with a subpoena before the parties’ required initial conference, seeking the identity of the subscriber assigned IP address 23.116.232.165.
The court found good cause because Strike 3 had identified the defendant sufficiently, described efforts to locate the defendant, presented a potentially valid copyright claim, and showed a reasonable chance that the subpoena would identify the defendant. The court granted the request and allowed Strike 3 to seek the subscriber’s true name and address.
Judge Virginia K. Demarchi ordered AT&T U-verse to notify the subscriber, allowed AT&T U-verse to object or seek a protective order, and prohibited Strike 3 from publicly disclosing any identifying information without the subscriber’s consent or court permission.
The detailed version
- Strike 3 Holdings v. John Doe subscriber assigned IP address 23.116.232.165 · No. 5:21-cv-09816
- Virginia Demarchi
- Jan. 4, 2022
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 23.116.232.165.
Court’s Analysis
The court found good cause for allowing this early third-party discovery. It stated that Strike 3 had shown that:
- it could identify the defendant specifically enough for the court to determine that the defendant was a real person or entity who could be sued in federal court; - it had identified earlier steps taken to locate the defendant; - its case could withstand a motion to dismiss; and - there was a reasonable likelihood that discovery would identify the defendant so that service of process would be possible.
The court also noted that Strike 3’s application indicated that it had satisfied the copyright-registration requirement under 17 U.S.C. § 411(a). The court concluded that Strike 3 could properly use discovery at this stage to determine the defendant’s identity.
Order
The court granted Strike 3’s application and allowed it to serve AT&T U-verse with a subpoena under Rule 45. The subpoena must include a copy of the order and must request the true name and address of the subscriber assigned the specified IP address.
AT&T U-verse must serve the subscriber with copies of the subpoena and this order within 30 days after the subpoena is served on AT&T U-verse. AT&T U-verse may use any reasonable method to provide that notice. It may also object to the subpoena or seek a protective order.
Strike 3 may use information produced in response to the subpoena only to protect and enforce the rights described in its complaint. If AT&T U-verse provides identifying information, Strike 3 may not publicly disclose it without the subscriber’s consent or permission from the court. Judge Virginia K. Demarchi signed the order.
Read the full 2-page opinion on CourtListener, the free public archive maintained by the Free Law Project.