Strike 3 Holdings, LLC v. John Doe subscriber assigned IP address 99.110.49.165
- Jeffrey White
- 4:23-cv-03081
- U.S. District Court · Northern District of California
- 3
In Strike 3 Holdings v. John Doe, Judge White granted permission to subpoena internet providers for the defendant’s name and address.
Strike 3 Holdings, LLC may seek the defendant’s identifying information from AT&T Internet and other identified internet service providers. The defendant and affected subscribers receive notice and may challenge the subpoenas, while the providers must preserve the information and follow the order’s disclosure limits.
What happened
Strike 3 Holdings, LLC asked the court for permission to subpoena an internet provider before the parties’ required early case conference. It sought the identity and address of the person assigned IP address 99.110.49.165.
The court found good cause and authorized Strike 3 to serve a subpoena on AT&T Internet, and on any later-identified internet service provider for the defendant. The subpoenas may request only the defendant’s true name and address.
The order requires notice to the subscriber, gives the subscriber and providers 30 days to challenge a subpoena, and requires the providers to preserve the information. Judge Jeffrey White also limited use of the information to protecting Strike 3’s copyright rights and required personal identifying information to be filed under seal.
The detailed version
- Strike 3 Holdings, LLC v. John Doe subscriber assigned IP address 99.110.49.165 · No. 4:23-cv-03081
- Jeffrey White
- July 28, 2023
Background
Strike 3 Holdings, LLC asked for permission to serve a third-party subpoena before the parties held the conference required by Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 26(f). The subpoena sought information identifying the person to whom an internet provider assigned IP address 99.110.49.165.
Ruling
The court granted Strike 3’s motion after finding that it had shown good cause. The court authorized Strike 3 to serve a Rule 45 subpoena on AT&T Internet, identified as the initial internet service provider, seeking only the defendant’s true name and address. Strike 3 must attach the order to the subpoena.
The court also authorized Strike 3 to serve the same type of subpoena on any other internet service provider identified in response to a subpoena as providing internet service to the defendant. The order states that the authorized subpoenas qualify as court orders permitting disclosure under 47 U.S.C. § 551.
Notice and Challenges
Each provider has 30 days after being served to notify each affected subscriber by providing a copy of the subpoena and the order. Each subscriber and provider then has 30 days after service to file a motion challenging the subpoena, including a motion to quash or modify it. If no subscriber challenges the subpoena during that period, the provider has 10 days to produce the responsive information.
Each provider must preserve the subpoenaed information until it provides the information to Strike 3 or until a timely motion to quash is finally resolved.
Limits on Use and Sealing
Strike 3 may use information disclosed under the subpoenas only to protect its rights under the Copyright Act. Documents containing the name or other identifying information of a current or proposed defendant must be filed under seal under the court’s local sealing procedure. Publicly filed redacted documents should redact only the defendant’s name and other identifying information, while the case caption must continue to use the assigned IP address.
Read the full 3-page opinion on CourtListener, the free public archive maintained by the Free Law Project.