Strike 3 Holdings, LLC v. Doe
- Lorna Schofield
- 1:20-cv-07928
- U.S. District Court · Southern District of New York
- 2
In Strike 3 Holdings v. Doe, Judge Schofield granted permission to subpoena Verizon Fios for the unidentified defendant’s name and address.
Strike 3 Holdings, LLC, the unidentified defendant, Verizon Fios, and any other Internet service provider identified through the subpoena process.
What happened
In Strike 3 Holdings, LLC v. Doe, Strike 3 asked to serve a subpoena before the parties’ required initial conference. The defendant was identified in the caption only as John Doe, associated with an Internet address.
The court found that Strike 3 had shown a sufficient reason to serve Verizon Fios, the Internet provider, and possibly other identified Internet providers. The subpoenas could seek the defendant’s true name and address.
Judge Lorna G. Schofield granted the motion. The information could be used only to protect and enforce Strike 3’s rights described in its complaint, and Verizon Fios had to notify the defendant if federal cable-privacy law applied.
The detailed version
- Strike 3 Holdings, LLC v. Doe · No. 1:20-cv-07928
- Lorna Schofield
- Oct. 5, 2020
Background
Strike 3 Holdings, LLC asked for permission to serve a third-party subpoena before the parties held the conference required by Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 26(f). The defendant was identified as John Doe, a subscriber assigned the Internet Protocol address 96.250.252.238. The requested subpoena was directed to Verizon Fios, which the order calls the Internet service provider.
Court’s Analysis
The court found that Strike 3 had established “good cause” to serve the subpoena before the Rule 26(f) conference. The order does not explain the underlying claims in detail or decide their merits.
Order
The court granted the motion at Docket 6. Strike 3 may serve Verizon Fios with a subpoena under Rule 45 requiring it to provide the defendant’s true name and address. Strike 3 must attach the court’s order to the subpoena.
The order also permits Strike 3 to serve the same type of subpoena on another Internet service provider identified in response to a subpoena as providing Internet services to one of the defendants. Strike 3 may use information produced in response to a subpoena served on Verizon Fios only to protect and enforce the rights described in its complaint.
If Verizon Fios qualifies as a “cable operator” under 47 U.S.C. § 522(5), it must comply with 47 U.S.C. § 551(c)(2)(B) by sending a copy of the order to the defendant before disclosing personal identifying information. Judge Lorna G. Schofield directed the clerk to close the motion.
Read the full 2-page opinion on CourtListener, the free public archive maintained by the Free Law Project.