Strike 3 Holdings v. John Doe subscriber assigned IP address 23.119.123.183

Background

Strike 3 Holdings, LLC asked for permission to serve a third-party subpoena on AT&T U-verse, the internet service provider identified in the order, before the parties’ conference required by Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 26(f). Strike 3 sought the subpoena to identify the defendant, who is named as John Doe Subscriber Assigned IP Address 23.119.123.183.

Ruling

Judge Susan Van Keulen granted the application based on good cause, subject to conditions. The subpoena may request only the actual name and address of the subscriber to whom the provider assigned the specified Internet Protocol address during the period beginning 14 days before the first alleged infringing act and ending 14 days after the last alleged infringing act identified in Exhibit A to the complaint. Strike 3 must attach the order to the subpoena and may use information disclosed by the provider only to protect the rights described in the complaint.

AT&T U-verse must serve the subscriber with the subpoena and the order within 14 days after being served. The subpoena’s return date must be at least 45 days after service on the provider. The provider may not disclose identifying information to Strike 3 before that return date or before the resolution of any motion to quash or modify the subpoena.

John Doe has 30 days after service to file a motion contesting the subpoena, including a motion to quash or modify it, in the court district where compliance is required. AT&T U-verse must preserve the subpoenaed information while any timely motion is pending.

If the provider gives identifying information to Strike 3, Strike 3 may not publicly disclose it until John Doe has had an opportunity to ask to proceed anonymously and the court has ruled on that request. If John Doe does not file that request within 30 days after the information is disclosed to Strike 3, the limited protective order will expire. The court also stated that papers containing identifying information may be filed under seal while it considers the request for anonymous litigation, with an opportunity for Strike 3 to respond.

Finally, the court denied no part of the application but required Strike 3 to seek separate permission before serving a subpoena on any other internet service provider identified later. This was a discovery and pretrial order; the opinion did not decide the underlying claims.