Strike 3 Holdings, LLC v. Doe
- Vincent Briccetti
- 7:20-cv-08856
- U.S. District Court · Southern District of New York
- 2
In Strike 3 Holdings v. Doe, Judge Briccetti authorized early subpoenas to identify an anonymous internet subscriber before ordinary discovery began.
The order affected Strike 3 Holdings, LLC; the anonymous Doe defendant whose identity was sought; Verizon Fios; and any other internet service provider identified through the authorized subpoenas.
What happened
Strike 3 Holdings, LLC sued an anonymous defendant identified by an internet address. It asked to obtain the subscriber’s name and address from Verizon Fios before the parties held their required initial discovery conference.
The court found that Strike 3 Holdings had shown a legally sufficient reason, called “good cause,” for seeking the information early. The order allowed subpoenas to Verizon Fios and, if necessary, to other internet providers identified through those subpoenas.
Judge Briccetti also required limits on the information’s use and directed that the anonymous defendant receive a copy of the order if federal cable-privacy rules applied. The clerk was instructed to terminate the motion.
The detailed version
- Strike 3 Holdings, LLC v. Doe · No. 7:20-cv-08856
- Vincent Briccetti
- Oct. 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 true name and address of the defendant associated with the Internet Protocol (IP) address identified in the complaint. The defendant was identified in the caption as John Doe subscriber assigned IP address 108.54.200.141.
Court’s analysis
The court found that Strike 3 Holdings had established “good cause” to obtain the information before the usual discovery process began. The order relied on decisions involving early subpoenas used to identify anonymous defendants. The opinion did not decide the underlying claims against Doe.
Order
The court authorized Strike 3 Holdings to serve Verizon Fios with a subpoena under Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 45, requiring Verizon Fios to provide the defendant’s true name and address. Strike 3 Holdings had to attach a copy of the order to the subpoena. The court also authorized subpoenas to any other internet service provider identified in response to a subpoena as providing internet services to one of the defendants.
If Verizon Fios qualified as a “cable operator” under the cited federal statute, it had to comply with the statute’s requirement concerning disclosure of personal identifying information by sending a copy of the order to the defendant. Strike 3 Holdings could use information produced in response to the subpoena only to protect and enforce the rights asserted in its complaint. The clerk was instructed to terminate the motion.
Read the full 2-page opinion on CourtListener, the free public archive maintained by the Free Law Project.