Strike 3 Holdings, LLC v. John Doe subscriber assigned IP address 75.11.11.135
- Thomas Hixson
- 3:23-cv-01132
- U.S. District Court · Northern District of California
- 2
In Strike 3 Holdings v. John Doe, Judge Hixson granted permission to subpoena AT&T before the parties’ required conference to identify the defendant.
Strike 3 Holdings, LLC, the unnamed subscriber associated with IP address 75.11.11.135, AT&T Internet, and any other internet service provider identified in response to a subpoena.
What happened
Strike 3 Holdings, LLC sued an unnamed defendant associated with internet protocol address 75.11.11.135. It asked to subpoena AT&T Internet before the parties held their required early-case conference.
The court found good cause and granted the request. Strike 3 may serve AT&T with a subpoena seeking the defendant’s true name and address, and may subpoena other identified internet providers if necessary. The providers must notify the subscriber, who may challenge the subpoena within 30 days; identifying information must be filed under seal.
This was a discovery order, not a decision on the underlying claims. United States Magistrate Judge Thomas S. Hixson issued the order on March 30, 2023.
The detailed version
- Strike 3 Holdings, LLC v. John Doe subscriber assigned IP address 75.11.11.135 · No. 3:23-cv-01132
- Thomas Hixson
- Mar. 30, 2023
Background
Strike 3 Holdings, LLC asked for permission to serve a third-party subpoena before the parties’ required conference under Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 26(f). The requested subpoena sought the true name and address of the defendant associated with the internet protocol address listed in the complaint. The opinion identifies AT&T Internet as the internet service provider.
Order
The court found that Strike 3 had established “good cause” to serve the subpoena and granted the application. Strike 3 may serve AT&T with a Rule 45 subpoena, which is a formal demand for information issued in connection with a lawsuit. Strike 3 may also serve a similar subpoena on any other internet service provider identified in response to a subpoena as providing internet service to one of the defendants.
If AT&T qualifies as a cable operator under the cited federal statute, it must follow the statute’s notice requirement by sending the defendant a copy of the court’s order. Strike 3 may use information obtained through the subpoena only to protect and enforce the rights described in its complaint.
Notice and Challenges
The internet service provider must serve the subscriber with a copy of the subpoena and the order within 30 days after the subpoena is served. The subscriber and the provider each have 30 days after service to file a motion challenging the subpoena, including a motion to cancel or modify it. If no timely challenge is filed, the provider must produce the responsive information within 10 days after the challenge period ends. The provider must preserve the subpoenaed information while awaiting production or resolution of a timely challenge. Any name or other identifying information of a current or proposed defendant must be filed under seal.
Disposition and Classification
The court granted Strike 3’s ex parte motion for leave to serve a third-party subpoena before a Rule 26(f) conference. The order addressed pretrial discovery and did not decide the underlying claims against the unnamed defendant. United States Magistrate Judge Thomas S. Hixson entered the order on March 30, 2023.
Read the full 2-page opinion on CourtListener, the free public archive maintained by the Free Law Project.