Court, Explained
U.S. Federal District Courts
Back to docket
N.D. Cal.Procedural orderFiled July 12, 2022

Strike 3 Holdings, LLC v. John Doe subscriber assigned IP address 24.4.118.204

Judge
Donna Ryu
Docket
4:22-cv-03301
Court
U.S. District Court · Northern District of California
Pages
3
DiscoveryCivil Procedure
In one sentence

In Strike 3 Holdings v. John Doe, Judge Ryu authorized a subpoena seeking the defendant’s name and address from Comcast.

Who this affects

Strike 3 Holdings, LLC may seek the defendant’s name and address from Comcast and other identified internet providers. The subscriber receives notice and an opportunity to challenge the subpoena, while Comcast must preserve the information and comply with the order’s procedures.

What happened

In Strike 3 Holdings, LLC v. John Doe subscriber assigned IP address 24.4.118.204, the plaintiff asked to serve a subpoena on Comcast before the parties’ required early case conference. The court found good cause for the request.

The court authorized subpoenas seeking the defendant’s true name and address and allowed similar subpoenas to other identified internet providers. Comcast must notify the subscriber, who has 30 days to challenge the subpoena; the information must be preserved, and any identifying information must be filed under seal.

Judge Donna M. Ryu issued the order on July 12, 2022. The order addressed early information gathering and did not decide the underlying claims.

The detailed version

For law students, journalists, and other readers who want the full reasoning

Case
Strike 3 Holdings, LLC v. John Doe subscriber assigned IP address 24.4.118.204 · No. 4:22-cv-03301
Judge
Donna Ryu
Date
July 12, 2022

Background

Strike 3 Holdings, LLC filed an ex parte application seeking permission to serve a third-party subpoena before the parties held the conference required by Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 26(f). The requested subpoena was directed to Comcast Cable, identified as the internet service provider.

Court’s Authorization

The court found that Strike 3 had shown “good cause” to serve the subpoena. It authorized Strike 3 to serve a Rule 45 subpoena requiring Comcast to provide the true name and address of the defendant associated with the IP address listed in Exhibit A to the complaint. Strike 3 must attach a copy of the order to the subpoena.

The court also authorized Strike 3 to serve the same type of subpoena on any other internet service provider identified in response to a subpoena as providing internet services to one of the defendants.

Notice and Subscriber Protections

If Comcast qualifies as a cable operator under 47 U.S.C. § 522(5), it must comply with 47 U.S.C. § 551(c)(2)(B), which allows disclosure of personally identifying information under a court order when the subscriber is notified. Comcast must serve the subscriber with copies of the subpoena and this order within 30 days after service on Comcast, using any reasonable method, including first-class mail or overnight delivery to the last known address.

The subscriber and Comcast each have 30 days after service to file a motion contesting the subpoena, including a motion to quash or modify it. If the subscriber does not contest the subpoena within that period, Comcast has 10 days to produce the responsive information. Comcast must preserve the subpoenaed information while awaiting production or the final resolution of a timely motion to quash.

Confidentiality and Disposition

The court ordered that the name and other personally identifying information of any current or proposed defendant be filed under seal. If substantive motions are filed, such as a summary-judgment motion, the court may require the defendant to seek permission to proceed anonymously.

Judge Donna M. Ryu issued the order authorizing the requested third-party discovery. The order concerned identification of the person associated with the IP address and did not resolve the underlying claims.

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.