Strike 3 Holdings, LLC v. John Doe subscriber assigned IP address 174.85.76.189
- 3:22-cv-06329
- U.S. District Court · Northern District of California
- 3
In Strike 3 Holdings v. John Doe, the court allowed a subpoena to identify the defendant; the judge is not identified clearly.
Strike 3 Holdings, LLC, the John Doe defendant associated with IP address 174.85.76.189, Spectrum, and any other internet-service provider identified through the subpoena process.
What happened
In Strike 3 Holdings, LLC v. John Doe Subscriber Assigned IP Address 174.85.76.189, Strike 3 Holdings asked for permission to subpoena Spectrum before the parties held their required early case-management conference. The requested information could identify the person assigned the internet address listed in the complaint.
The court found good cause and allowed Strike 3 Holdings to serve Spectrum with a subpoena seeking the defendant’s true name and address. The order also allowed subpoenas to later-identified internet-service providers under the same conditions.
The court required notice to the subscriber, allowed the subscriber or provider 30 days to challenge the subpoena, and required the provider to preserve the information. The court also ordered personal identifying information to be filed under seal. The judge’s signature is not clearly readable in the provided opinion text.
The detailed version
- Strike 3 Holdings, LLC v. John Doe subscriber assigned IP address 174.85.76.189 · No. 3:22-cv-06329
- Nov. 28, 2022
Background
Strike 3 Holdings, LLC filed an application without advance notice to the opposing party seeking permission to serve a third-party subpoena before the parties’ Rule 26(f) conference. The proposed subpoena would be served on Spectrum, which the order identifies as the internet service provider, to obtain the true name and address of the defendant associated with the internet protocol address listed in Exhibit A to the complaint.
Ruling
The court found that Strike 3 Holdings had shown good cause to serve the subpoena. It authorized Strike 3 Holdings to serve Spectrum with a Rule 45 subpoena and to attach a copy of the order. It also authorized a similar subpoena to any service provider identified in response to the first subpoena as providing internet services to the defendant.
Conditions on the subpoenas
If the provider qualifies as a cable operator under 47 U.S.C. § 522(5), the order required it to follow 47 U.S.C. § 551(c)(2)(B), including notifying the subscriber by sending a copy of the order. Strike 3 Holdings could use information produced through the subpoena only to protect and enforce the rights described in its complaint.
The provider had to serve the subscriber with copies of the subpoena and order within 30 days after the subpoena was served on the provider. Each subscriber and the provider had 30 days after service to file a motion challenging, quashing, or modifying the subpoena. If no subscriber timely challenged the subpoena, the provider would have 10 additional days to produce the responsive information. The provider also had to preserve the subpoenaed information until production or final resolution of a timely challenge. The defendant’s name and other identifying information had to be filed provisionally under seal. After service on the defendant, the court could require the defendant to seek permission to proceed anonymously.
Read the full 3-page opinion on CourtListener, the free public archive maintained by the Free Law Project.