Court, Explained
U.S. Federal District Courts
Back to docket
N.D. Cal.Procedural orderFiled June 29, 2022

Strike 3 Holdings v. John Doe subscriber assigned IP address 135.180.214.148

Full caption

Strike 3 Holdings, LLC v. John Doe subscriber assigned IP address 135.180.214.148

Judge
Haywood Gilliam
Docket
4:22-cv-02893
Court
U.S. District Court · Northern District of California
Pages
3
DiscoveryCivil Procedure
In one sentence

In Strike 3 Holdings v. John Doe, Judge Gilliam authorized a subpoena seeking the defendant’s identity from an internet provider.

Who this affects

Strike 3 Holdings, LLC, John Doe Subscriber Assigned IP Address 135.180.214.148, Sonic.net, LLC, and any other internet-service provider identified in response to a subpoena.

What happened

In Strike 3 Holdings, LLC v. John Doe Subscriber Assigned IP Address 135.180.214.148, Strike 3 Holdings asked to subpoena Sonic.net, LLC before the parties’ required early case conference. The subpoena would seek the defendant’s true name and address.

The court found good cause and allowed Strike 3 Holdings to serve the subpoena. Sonic.net must notify the subscriber, who may challenge the subpoena within 30 days; the court also limited use of any identifying information and kept it confidential while allowing the defendant to seek permission to proceed anonymously.

Judge Haywood S. Gilliam, Jr. issued the order on June 29, 2022. The order addressed discovery and confidentiality only; it did not decide whether John Doe infringed Strike 3 Holdings’ 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 135.180.214.148 · No. 4:22-cv-02893
Judge
Haywood Gilliam
Date
June 29, 2022

Background

Strike 3 Holdings, LLC asked the court for permission to serve a third-party subpoena on Sonic.net, LLC 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 defendant, identified in the complaint and caption as John Doe Subscriber Assigned IP Address 135.180.214.148.

Ruling

The court granted the application, finding that Strike 3 Holdings had shown “good cause” to serve the subpoena under Rule 45. Strike 3 Holdings may serve Sonic.net with a subpoena seeking the defendant’s identifying information and must attach the order to that subpoena. It may also serve the same type of subpoena on any other internet-service provider identified in response to a subpoena as providing internet services to the defendant.

Each internet-service provider has 30 days after service to notify each subscriber whose information is sought by providing a copy of the subpoena and the order. Each subscriber and provider then has 30 days after service to file a motion contesting the subpoena, including a motion to quash or modify it. If no challenge is filed during that period, the provider has 10 days to produce the responsive information.

If Sonic.net qualifies as a cable operator under federal law, it must comply with the notice requirement in 47 U.S.C. § 551(c)(2)(B) by sending the defendant a copy of the order. Strike 3 Holdings may use information produced in response to the subpoena only to protect and enforce the rights asserted in its complaint.

Protective order

The court issued a limited protective order because the subscriber might not be the person who allegedly infringed the copyright and because the case involved public accusations of illegally downloading adult motion pictures. Any name or other identifying information released to Strike 3 Holdings must be treated as confidential and may not be publicly disclosed until the defendant has had an opportunity to ask to proceed anonymously and the court has ruled on that request. If the defendant does not file that request within 30 days after the information is disclosed, the limited protective order will expire.

The order did not decide whether John Doe infringed Strike 3 Holdings’ copyright.

The authoritative version

Read the full 3-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.