Strike 3 Holdings, LLC v. John Doe subscriber assigned IP address 99.4.121.96
- Haywood Gilliam
- 4:23-cv-03052
- U.S. District Court · Northern District of California
- 3
In Strike 3 Holdings v. John Doe, Judge Gilliam allowed an early subpoena to identify the subscriber, subject to notice, challenges, and confidentiality protections.
Strike 3 Holdings, LLC, the John Doe subscriber associated with IP address 99.4.121.96, AT&T Internet, and any other internet service provider identified in response to the subpoena.
What happened
Strike 3 Holdings, LLC v. John Doe Subscriber Assigned IP Address 99.4.121.96 concerned Strike 3’s request to identify the person connected to an internet address before the parties’ required early case conference.
The court found good cause and allowed Strike 3 to subpoena AT&T Internet for the subscriber’s name and address. The order also allowed subpoenas to later-identified internet providers, required notice, gave the subscriber and providers 30 days to challenge the subpoena, and limited how the information could be used.
Judge Haywood S. Gilliam, Jr. also ordered that any identifying information remain confidential while the subscriber had an opportunity to ask to proceed anonymously. The court granted the application for permission to serve the early subpoena.
The detailed version
- Strike 3 Holdings, LLC v. John Doe subscriber assigned IP address 99.4.121.96 · No. 4:23-cv-03052
- Haywood Gilliam
- Aug. 8, 2023
Background
Strike 3 Holdings, LLC asked for permission to serve a third-party subpoena on AT&T Internet before the parties held the conference normally required by Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 26(f). Strike 3 sought the true name and address of the John Doe defendant associated with the internet protocol address listed in the complaint and case caption.
Ruling on the subpoena
The court found that Strike 3 had shown good cause under Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 45. It allowed Strike 3 to serve AT&T Internet with a subpoena requesting the defendant’s name and address and required Strike 3 to attach the order to the subpoena. The court also allowed Strike 3 to subpoena any other internet service provider identified in response as providing internet service to the defendant.
Notice and challenges
If AT&T Internet qualified as a cable operator under the federal cable-privacy statute, it had to notify the subscriber by sending a copy of the order. Each internet service provider had 30 days after service to give the affected subscriber a copy of the subpoena and the order. Each subscriber and provider then had 30 days after service on that person or entity to file a motion challenging the subpoena, including a motion to quash or modify it. If no challenge was filed within that period, the provider had 10 days to produce the requested information.
Confidentiality protection
The court issued a limited protective order because the subscriber might not be the person who allegedly infringed Strike 3’s copyright and because of the possible embarrassment from being publicly accused of illegally downloading adult motion pictures. Any name or other identifying information released to Strike 3 had to remain confidential until the defendant had an opportunity to ask to proceed anonymously and the court ruled on that request. The protective order would expire if the defendant did not file that request within 30 days after the information was disclosed.
Disposition
Judge Haywood S. Gilliam, Jr. granted Strike 3’s ex parte application for permission to serve the third-party subpoena. The order addressed early discovery and confidentiality protections; it did not state a ruling on whether the defendant infringed Strike 3’s copyright.
Read the full 3-page opinion on CourtListener, the free public archive maintained by the Free Law Project.