Strike 3 Holdings, LLC v. John Doe subscriber assigned IP address 70.252.19.216
- Yvonne Rogers
- 4:24-cv-00437
- U.S. District Court · Northern District of California
- 5
In Strike 3 Holdings v. John Doe, Judge Illman granted early discovery so Strike 3 could subpoena AT&T for the defendant’s identity.
Strike 3 Holdings, LLC may subpoena AT&T Internet and potentially other identified internet service providers for the Doe defendant’s name and addresses. The Doe defendant may challenge the subpoena within the specified 30-day period, and the providers must preserve and handle the information under the order’s restrictions.
What happened
In Strike 3 Holdings, LLC v. John Doe Subscriber Assigned IP Address 70.252.19.216, Strike 3 alleged that the unidentified defendant distributed its copyrighted movies through the BitTorrent network. Strike 3 asked to subpoena the defendant’s internet provider before the usual early-case conference to learn the defendant’s name and address.
The court found good cause for the request. It concluded that Strike 3 had identified a specific, potentially real defendant, described efforts to identify that person, alleged a copyright claim that could proceed, and showed that the subpoena was reasonably likely to produce information needed to serve the defendant.
Judge Robert M. Illman granted Strike 3’s application. The order allows a subpoena to AT&T Internet, protects the disclosed information temporarily, and gives the Doe defendant 30 days after notice to challenge the subpoena.
The detailed version
- Strike 3 Holdings, LLC v. John Doe subscriber assigned IP address 70.252.19.216 · No. 4:24-cv-00437
- Yvonne Rogers
- Feb. 15, 2024
Background
Strike 3 Holdings, LLC alleged that the unidentified defendant, associated with IP address 70.252.19.216, downloaded and distributed many of Strike 3’s copyrighted adult motion pictures through the BitTorrent network. Strike 3 said its forensic software identified the IP address but not the defendant’s true identity. It asked for permission to serve a Rule 45 subpoena on the defendant’s internet service provider, AT&T Internet, before the required Rule 26(f) conference. The requested information was intended to identify the defendant, investigate the alleged infringement, and allow service of the lawsuit.
Court’s analysis
Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 26(d) permits a court to authorize discovery before the Rule 26(f) conference when the interests of justice support it. The court applied the good-cause factors used for identifying an unknown defendant through early discovery.
The court found that Strike 3 had identified the Doe defendant with enough specificity for the court to determine that the defendant could be a real person subject to suit in federal court. Strike 3 alleged that the defendant used the identified IP address to download and distribute the works, and it used forensic software to establish direct connections with that address. Strike 3 also used geolocation technology to trace the address to a physical address within the Northern District of California.
The court further found that Strike 3 could identify the IP address but could not identify the defendant without the subpoena. It concluded that Strike 3 had adequately alleged ownership of valid copyrights and unauthorized copying and distribution, satisfying the requirements for a preliminary direct-infringement showing. Finally, the court found that the requested discovery was reasonably likely to produce information allowing service of process.
Protective order
Information about the Doe defendant released by the internet service provider must remain confidential for a limited period. Strike 3 may not publicly disclose the information until the defendant has had an opportunity to ask to proceed anonymously and the court has ruled on that request. The defendant may seek to file that motion under seal. If the defendant does not file a motion to proceed anonymously within 30 days after the information is disclosed to Strike 3’s counsel, the limited protective order expires.
Ruling and practical effect
The court GRANTS Strike 3’s Ex Parte Application for Leave to Serve a Third Party Subpoena Prior to a Rule 26(f) Conference. Strike 3 may immediately serve a Rule 45 subpoena on AT&T Internet seeking the Doe defendant’s true name and addresses, with a copy of the order attached. The order also permits subpoenas to other internet service providers identified through the process.
The subpoenaed provider must notify the Doe defendant within 30 days after service. The Doe defendant then has 30 days after receiving notice to file a motion contesting the subpoena, including a motion to quash or modify it. If no timely challenge is filed, the provider has 10 days to produce responsive information. The provider must preserve subpoenaed information while any timely motion to quash is pending, and information disclosed may be used only to protect Strike 3’s rights stated in the complaint.
Read the full 5-page opinion on CourtListener, the free public archive maintained by the Free Law Project.