Court, Explained
U.S. Federal District Courts
Back to docket
N.D. Cal.Procedural orderFiled Mar. 31, 2023

Strike 3 Holdings v. John Doe subscriber assigned IP address 24.176.239.232

Judge
Joseph Spero
Docket
3:23-cv-01141
Court
U.S. District Court · Northern District of California
Pages
3
DiscoveryIntellectual PropertyCivil Procedure
In one sentence

In Strike 3 Holdings v. John Doe, Judge Spero allowed early subpoenas to identify the subscriber linked to an IP address in a copyright case.

Who this affects

Strike 3 Holdings, LLC; John Doe Subscriber Assigned IP Address 24.176.239.232; Spectrum; and any other Internet service provider identified in response to a subpoena.

What happened

Strike 3 Holdings, LLC asked to serve a subpoena before the parties held their required early case-management conference. The subpoena sought the name and address of the subscriber assigned the listed Internet Protocol address.

The court granted the application. It allowed subpoenas to Spectrum and any other Internet service provider identified in response, subject to notice and an opportunity to challenge the subpoenas.

Judge Spero ordered the providers to preserve the information and restricted its use to protecting Strike 3 Holdings’ rights under the Copyright Act.

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 24.176.239.232 · No. 3:23-cv-01141
Judge
Joseph Spero
Date
Mar. 31, 2023

Background

Strike 3 Holdings, LLC requested permission to serve a third-party subpoena before the parties’ Rule 26(f) conference, an early conference about managing a federal lawsuit. The subpoena was directed to Spectrum and sought the true name and address of the defendant associated with Internet Protocol address 24.176.239.232.

Ruling

The court found that Strike 3 Holdings had shown “good cause” and granted its ex parte application for leave to serve the subpoena before the Rule 26(f) conference. The court authorized Strike 3 Holdings to serve a subpoena under Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 45 on Spectrum. It also authorized a subpoena on any other Internet service provider identified in response as providing Internet services to the defendant.

Notice and challenges

The order treated the authorized subpoenas as court orders permitting disclosure under 47 U.S.C. § 551. Each provider must notify each subscriber whose identifying information is sought within 30 days after being served, using a reasonable method such as first-class mail or overnight service.

Each subscriber and provider has 30 days after service on that person or entity to file a motion contesting the subpoena, including a motion to quash or modify it. If no timely challenge is filed, the provider has 10 days to produce the responsive information to Strike 3 Holdings. The providers must preserve the subpoenaed information while awaiting production or the final resolution of a timely motion to quash.

Limits on disclosure

Information disclosed in response to a subpoena may be used only to protect Strike 3 Holdings’ rights under the Copyright Act. Information concerning a current or proposed defendant must be filed under seal and not otherwise disclosed.

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.