Strike 3 Holdings, LLC v. Doe
- Jed Rakoff
- 1:20-cv-07925
- U.S. District Court · Southern District of New York
- 2
In Strike 3 Holdings, LLC v. Doe, Judge Rakoff allowed Strike 3 to subpoena internet providers for John Doe’s name and address before discovery began.
Strike 3 Holdings, LLC may seek John Doe’s name and address from Verizon Fios and other identified internet service providers. John Doe may receive notice if the provider qualifies as a cable operator.
What happened
In Strike 3 Holdings, LLC v. John Doe, Strike 3 Holdings asked to serve a subpoena on Verizon Fios before the parties held their required early case-planning meeting. The subpoena sought the name and address of the subscriber assigned the internet address listed in the complaint.
The court found good cause and allowed Strike 3 Holdings to serve the subpoena. It also allowed subpoenas to other internet providers identified in response. The information could be used only to protect and enforce Strike 3 Holdings’ rights stated in the complaint. If Verizon Fios qualifies as a cable operator, it must notify the subscriber by sending a copy of the order.
Judge Jed Rakoff issued the order authorizing these subpoenas. The order did not decide the underlying claims against John Doe.
The detailed version
- Strike 3 Holdings, LLC v. Doe · No. 1:20-cv-07925
- Jed Rakoff
- Oct. 5, 2020
Background
Strike 3 Holdings, LLC asked for permission to serve a third-party subpoena before the parties conducted the conference required by Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 26(f). The requested subpoena was directed to Verizon Fios, identified as the internet service provider assigned the internet protocol address 96.232.160.154 to the defendant identified in the complaint as John Doe.
Court’s ruling
The court found that Strike 3 Holdings had shown “good cause” to serve the subpoena before the Rule 26(f) conference. It authorized Strike 3 Holdings to serve Verizon Fios with a subpoena under Rule 45 requiring Verizon Fios to provide the defendant’s true name and address. Strike 3 Holdings must attach a copy of the order to the subpoena.
The court also authorized Strike 3 Holdings to serve the same type of subpoena on any service provider identified in response as providing internet services to one of the defendants. The information obtained through a Rule 45 subpoena served on the internet service provider may be used only to protect and enforce the rights asserted in the complaint.
If Verizon Fios qualifies as a “cable operator” under 47 U.S.C. § 522(5), the order requires it to follow 47 U.S.C. § 551(c)(2)(B), which permits disclosure of identifying information under a court order when the subscriber is notified. The order therefore requires a copy of the order to be sent to the defendant.
Effect of the order
The order concerns early discovery—the process of obtaining information relevant to a lawsuit before the case proceeds further. It authorizes subpoenas but does not resolve the underlying claims or determine whether John Doe is liable. Judge Jed Rakoff issued the order.
Read the full 2-page opinion on CourtListener, the free public archive maintained by the Free Law Project.