Strike 3 Holdings, LLC v. Doe
- Andrew Carter
- 1:20-cv-01525
- U.S. District Court · Southern District of New York
- 2
In Strike 3 Holdings v. Doe, Judge Carter allowed a subpoena to identify the defendant before the required initial conference.
Strike 3 Holdings, LLC may seek the defendant's true name and address from Spectrum and certain other identified internet service providers, subject to notice and use restrictions.
What happened
Strike 3 Holdings, LLC sued John Doe, identified in the complaint by an internet-protocol address, and asked to subpoena Spectrum before the parties' required initial conference.
The court found good cause and allowed Strike 3 to subpoena Spectrum for the defendant's true name and address. It also allowed subpoenas to other internet providers identified through that process, subject to notice requirements and limits on using the information.
Judge Carter entered the order on March 6, 2020, allowing the early subpoenas but not deciding the underlying claims.
The detailed version
- Strike 3 Holdings, LLC v. Doe · No. 1:20-cv-01525
- Andrew Carter
- Mar. 6, 2020
Background
Strike 3 Holdings, LLC asked for permission to serve a subpoena on Spectrum before the parties' conference required by Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 26(f). The defendant was identified in the complaint as John Doe, a subscriber assigned internet-protocol address 142.255.47.155.
Ruling
The court found that Strike 3 had shown “good cause” to obtain information before the Rule 26(f) conference. The order allowed Strike 3 to serve Spectrum with a Rule 45 subpoena—a formal demand for information issued in litigation—requiring Spectrum to provide the defendant's true name and address. Strike 3 must attach a copy of the order to the subpoena.
The order also allowed Strike 3 to serve the same type of subpoena on any service provider identified in response to a subpoena as providing internet services to one of the defendants. If Spectrum qualifies as a cable operator under the cited federal statute, it must send the defendant a copy of the order to provide the required notice.
Strike 3 may use information obtained from the subpoena only to protect and enforce the rights asserted in its complaint. The order authorized early discovery and did not decide the underlying claims. Judge Andrew L. Carter, Jr. signed the order.
Read the full 2-page opinion on CourtListener, the free public archive maintained by the Free Law Project.