Strike 3 Holdings, LLC v. Doe
- Gregory Woods
- 1:20-cv-07924
- U.S. District Court · Southern District of New York
- 3
In Strike 3 Holdings v. Doe, Judge Woods granted Strike 3’s motion to subpoena Verizon Fios before the required conference to identify an IP subscriber.
Strike 3 Holdings, LLC may obtain identifying information through an early subpoena; Verizon Fios must attempt to identify and notify the subscriber associated with the specified IP address; and the subscriber may object or ask the court to cancel the subpoena.
What happened
Strike 3 Holdings, LLC sued a person identified as Doe and sought permission to subpoena Verizon Fios before the parties held the conference normally required before discovery. The subpoena sought the name and address of the subscriber assigned to IP address 74.101.15.193.
Judge Woods found that Strike 3 had shown reasonableness and good cause, even under the stricter review required for a one-sided request. The order did not decide whether a later challenge to the subpoena should succeed.
Judge Gregory H. Woods granted Strike 3’s motion to serve the early subpoena. Verizon Fios must try to identify and notify the subscriber, and both Verizon Fios and the subscriber received deadlines to object or ask the court to cancel the subpoena. Any disclosed information may be used only to protect and enforce Strike 3’s rights in the complaint and may not be shared further without court permission.
The detailed version
- Strike 3 Holdings, LLC v. Doe · No. 1:20-cv-07924
- Gregory Woods
- Sept. 30, 2020
Background
Strike 3 Holdings, LLC asked for permission to serve a subpoena on Verizon Fios before the parties held the conference required by Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 26(f). The subpoena sought the name and address of the subscriber associated with IP address 74.101.15.193. The defendant is identified in the caption as John Doe.
Legal standard
Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 26(d) generally bars a party from seeking discovery before the Rule 26(f) conference unless a court authorizes early discovery. The court applied a flexible reasonableness-and-good-cause standard, with especially careful review because Strike 3 sought both expedited discovery and a ruling without advance notice to the other side.
The court noted that Strike 3 relied on a test used in cases involving efforts to protect a person's anonymity when challenging a subpoena. The court emphasized that anonymity and any possible later motion to cancel the subpoena were not at issue in this order.
Ruling
The court found that Strike 3 met the reasonableness and good-cause standard and granted its motion for permission to serve the subpoena before the Rule 26(f) conference.
The order required the following:
- Strike 3 may serve Verizon Fios with a subpoena under Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 45 to obtain the name and address of the subscriber associated with IP address 74.101.15.193. A copy of the order must accompany the subpoena. - Within seven days after the subpoena is served, Verizon Fios must reasonably try to identify the subscriber and provide the subscriber with copies of the subpoena and order. If Verizon Fios cannot identify the subscriber with a reasonable degree of technical certainty, it must notify Strike 3’s counsel. - Verizon Fios has 21 days after service to ask the court to cancel the subpoena or otherwise object. The identified subscriber has 14 days after receiving the subpoena from Verizon Fios to do the same. - If there is no objection or request to cancel the subpoena, Verizon Fios must provide the requested information to Strike 3 within 21 days after notifying the subscriber. - Strike 3 may use the information only to protect and enforce its rights described in the complaint. The information may not be disclosed to anyone other than Strike 3 and its counsel without further court permission.
This order did not decide the merits of any later challenge to the subpoena.
Read the full 3-page opinion on CourtListener, the free public archive maintained by the Free Law Project.