Strike 3 Holdings, LLC v. John Doe subscriber assigned IP address 47.27.224.172
- Jon Tigar
- 4:23-cv-06684
- U.S. District Court · Northern District of California
- 3
In Strike 3 Holdings v. John Doe, Judge Tigar allowed an early subpoena to identify the defendant, with notice and confidentiality protections.
Strike 3 Holdings, LLC, the John Doe subscriber associated with IP address 47.27.224.172, Spectrum, and any other internet service provider identified in response to a subpoena.
What happened
In Strike 3 Holdings, LLC v. John Doe Subscriber Assigned IP Address 47.27.224.172, Strike 3 asked to serve Spectrum, the internet service provider, with a subpoena before the parties held their required initial conference. The court found good cause and allowed the subpoena.
The subpoena may require Spectrum to provide the defendant’s true name and address. Strike 3 may also subpoena another internet provider identified in response. The providers must notify affected subscribers, who may challenge the subpoenas within 30 days. The court also required the identifying information to remain confidential while a subscriber has an opportunity to ask to proceed anonymously.
Judge Jon S. Tigar granted Strike 3’s application for permission to serve the subpoenas before the conference. The order did not decide whether the defendant infringed Strike 3’s copyright claims.
The detailed version
- Strike 3 Holdings, LLC v. John Doe subscriber assigned IP address 47.27.224.172 · No. 4:23-cv-06684
- Jon Tigar
- Jan. 24, 2024
Background
Strike 3 Holdings, LLC asked for permission to serve a third-party subpoena before the parties’ conference required by Rule 26(f) of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure. The subpoena was directed to Spectrum, identified in the order as the internet service provider, and sought the true name and address of the defendant associated with the internet protocol address listed in the complaint and case caption.
Ruling
The court found that Strike 3 had shown “good cause” to serve the subpoena under Rule 45. The court granted Strike 3 permission to serve Spectrum with a subpoena requiring the defendant’s true name and address, and required Strike 3 to attach the order to the subpoena. Strike 3 may also serve the same type of subpoena on another internet service provider identified in response to a subpoena as providing internet services to the defendant.
If the provider qualifies as a cable operator under federal law, it must send the defendant a copy of the order. Each provider has 30 days after being served to give each affected subscriber 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 cancel or modify it. If no challenge is filed, the provider has 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 publicly accusing someone of illegally downloading adult motion pictures could cause embarrassment. Any name or other identifying information released to Strike 3 must remain confidential and may not be publicly disclosed until the defendant has had an opportunity to ask to proceed anonymously and the court has ruled on that request. If the defendant does not file that request within 30 days after the information is disclosed to Strike 3, the limited protective order expires.
Disposition and Scope
The court granted the application for permission to serve a third-party subpoena before the Rule 26(f) conference. The order addressed discovery and confidentiality only; it did not decide whether the defendant committed copyright infringement.
Read the full 3-page opinion on CourtListener, the free public archive maintained by the Free Law Project.