Strike 3 Holdings, LLC v. John Doe subscriber assigned IP address 69.42.19.144
- Virginia Demarchi
- 5:22-cv-02831
- U.S. District Court · Northern District of California
- 3
In Strike 3 Holdings v. John Doe, Judge Demarchi allowed an early subpoena to identify the internet subscriber tied to IP address 69.42.19.144.
Strike 3 Holdings may seek the identity and address of the subscriber assigned IP address 69.42.19.144. Wave Broadband must notify the subscriber and may object to or seek protection from the subpoena.
What happened
Strike 3 Holdings, LLC v. John Doe Subscriber Assigned IP Address 69.42.19.144 involved Strike 3’s request to identify the person or entity using an internet address allegedly connected to copyright infringement.
The company asked to subpoena Wave Broadband before the parties held their required early case-management meeting. The court found good cause because Strike 3 had shown that the lawsuit could proceed, that it had taken steps to locate the defendant, and that Wave Broadband was reasonably likely to have identifying information. The court also noted that merely being the subscriber assigned an internet address does not by itself prove copyright infringement.
Judge Virginia K. Demarchi granted Strike 3’s application. The company may serve Wave Broadband with a subpoena seeking the subscriber’s true name and address. Wave Broadband must notify the subscriber, may object or seek protection from the subpoena, and Strike 3 may not publicly disclose identifying information without the subscriber’s consent or the court’s permission.
The detailed version
- Strike 3 Holdings, LLC v. John Doe subscriber assigned IP address 69.42.19.144 · No. 5:22-cv-02831
- Virginia Demarchi
- June 2, 2022
Background
Strike 3 Holdings, LLC asked for permission to serve a subpoena on Wave Broadband before the parties’ required Rule 26(f) conference. Wave Broadband was identified as the internet service provider for the subscriber assigned IP address 69.42.19.144.
Court’s analysis
The court found good cause for early discovery. It determined that Strike 3 had shown that:
- it could identify a real person or entity who could potentially be sued in federal court; - it had described prior efforts to locate the defendant; - its lawsuit could withstand a motion to dismiss; and - there was a reasonable likelihood that discovery would identify the defendant so service of process would be possible.
The application also indicated that Strike 3 had satisfied the copyright-registration requirement under 17 U.S.C. § 411(a). The court cautioned, however, that a bare allegation that someone was the registered subscriber of an internet address associated with infringing activity is not enough by itself to state a plausible claim for direct or contributory copyright infringement. At this stage, based on the record presented, the court concluded that Strike 3 could use limited discovery to determine the defendant’s identity.
Ruling and limits on discovery
Judge Virginia K. Demarchi granted Strike 3’s application for leave to serve a third-party subpoena. The order permits Strike 3 to serve Wave Broadband with a Rule 45 subpoena seeking the true name and address of the subscriber assigned IP address 69.42.19.144. Strike 3 must attach the court’s order to the subpoena.
Wave Broadband must serve the subscriber with copies of the subpoena and order within 30 days after the subpoena is served on Wave Broadband. Wave Broadband may use any reasonable notice method, including first-class mail or overnight service to the subscriber’s last known address. Wave Broadband may object to the subpoena and may seek a protective order.
Strike 3 may use information disclosed in response to the subpoena only to protect and enforce the rights described in its complaint. If Wave Broadband provides the subscriber’s identity, Strike 3 may not publicly disclose it without the subscriber’s consent or leave of court.
Read the full 3-page opinion on CourtListener, the free public archive maintained by the Free Law Project.