Court, Explained
U.S. Federal District Courts
Back to docket
N.D. Cal.Procedural orderFiled May 9, 2023

Strike 3 Holdings, LLC v. John Doe subscriber assigned IP address 98.45.38.202

Judge
Edward Chen
Docket
3:23-cv-01964
Court
U.S. District Court · Northern District of California
Pages
3
DiscoveryCivil ProcedureIntellectual Property
In one sentence

In Strike 3 Holdings v. John Doe, Judge Chen allowed a subpoena to identify the defendant before the usual discovery conference.

Who this affects

Strike 3 Holdings, LLC may seek John Doe’s identifying information from Comcast Cable. John Doe may contest the subpoena and may ask to proceed anonymously. Comcast Cable must notify Doe and, if there is no timely challenge, produce the subpoenaed information.

What happened

Strike 3 Holdings, LLC v. John Doe Subscriber Assigned IP Address 98.45.38.202 concerns Strike 3’s allegation that John Doe used BitTorrent to infringe 28 of its motion pictures. Strike 3 asked to identify Doe through the Internet service provider connected to the listed Internet Protocol address.

The court granted Strike 3’s request for limited early discovery before the parties’ required Rule 26(f) conference. It authorized Strike 3 to immediately serve Comcast Cable with a subpoena seeking Doe’s true name and address.

Comcast must give Doe the subpoena and this order, and Doe has 30 days to contest it. If Doe does not contest the subpoena, Comcast must provide the information within 10 days. Strike 3 may use the information only to serve Doe and pursue this lawsuit, and may not publicly disclose it while Doe’s request to proceed anonymously is pending. Judge Chen also stated that Doe may file a motion to dismiss and that the court was not deciding that motion in advance.

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 98.45.38.202 · No. 3:23-cv-01964
Judge
Edward Chen
Date
May 9, 2023

Background

Strike 3 Holdings, LLC sued John Doe, identified in the caption by the Internet Protocol address 98.45.38.202, for alleged copyright infringement. Strike 3 alleged that Doe infringed 28 of its motion pictures using BitTorrent. The court reviewed the complaint and the materials supporting Strike 3’s application, including declarations concerning alleged file transmissions, the similarity of the files to Strike 3’s motion pictures, Comcast’s connection to the Internet Protocol address, and efforts to trace the address.

Application for Early Discovery

Strike 3 sought permission to serve a third-party subpoena before the Rule 26(f) conference. This is a request for limited discovery before the normal discovery period begins. The court granted the application for reasons similar to those in another Strike 3 case. The order did not decide whether Doe infringed copyright or whether Strike 3 stated a valid claim.

Order

The court authorized Strike 3 to immediately serve Comcast Cable with a Rule 45 subpoena seeking Doe’s true name and address. Strike 3 must attach the order to the subpoena, and any information Comcast provides may be used only to serve Doe and prosecute the claims in the complaint.

Comcast has 30 days after service to provide Doe with the subpoena and the order. Doe then has the opportunity to file motions contesting the subpoena. If that 30-day period passes without a challenge, Comcast must provide the responsive information to Strike 3 within 10 days.

Strike 3 may not publicly disclose Doe’s identifying information until Doe has had an opportunity to ask to proceed anonymously and the court rules on that request. Doe has 30 days after service to file that request, and may file it under seal.

The court expressly stated that allowing early discovery did not prevent Doe from filing a motion under Rule 12(b)(6), which asks whether the complaint states a legally sufficient claim, and did not prejudge such a motion. The court also reminded Strike 3 of its obligation under Rule 11 to evaluate whether to continue the lawsuit after learning Doe’s identity. Judge Edward M. Chen granted the application and stated that the order disposed of Docket No. 7.

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.