Strike 3 Holdings, LLC v. Doe
- John Koeltl
- 1:20-cv-10739
- U.S. District Court · Southern District of New York
- 2
In Strike 3 Holdings v. Doe, Judge Koeltl allowed early subpoenas to identify the defendant connected to a specified internet address.
Strike 3 Holdings, LLC may seek the defendant’s identifying information from Verizon Internet Services and certain other identified service providers. John Doe may receive notice if the provider qualifies as a covered cable operator, and the disclosed information may be used only for the purposes stated in the order.
What happened
Strike 3 Holdings, LLC sued John Doe, identified by an internet address. It asked to subpoena Verizon Internet Services before the parties held their required early case conference.
The court found good cause to allow the subpoena. The subpoena may require Verizon to provide the defendant’s true name and address, and similar subpoenas may be served on other identified internet service providers.
Judge John G. Koeltl also required any covered cable operator to notify the defendant, and limited use of the disclosed information to protecting and enforcing Strike 3 Holdings’ rights in the complaint. The order did not decide the underlying claim.
The detailed version
- Strike 3 Holdings, LLC v. Doe · No. 1:20-cv-10739
- John Koeltl
- Dec. 29, 2020
Background
Strike 3 Holdings, LLC asked for permission to serve a third-party subpoena before the parties’ conference required by Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 26(f). The proposed subpoena was directed to Verizon Internet Services, identified in the order as the internet service provider, and concerned the subscriber assigned internet protocol address 65.242.187.146.
Court’s Analysis
The court found that Strike 3 Holdings had shown “good cause” to serve the subpoena early. The order authorized a subpoena under Rule 45 requiring Verizon to provide the defendant’s true name and address. Strike 3 Holdings must attach a copy of the order to the subpoena.
The order also allowed Strike 3 Holdings to serve a similar Rule 45 subpoena on any service provider identified in response to a subpoena as providing internet services to one of the defendants.
If Verizon 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) by sending a copy of the order to the defendant so the defendant is notified of the authorized disclosure. Strike 3 Holdings may use information disclosed in response to the subpoena only to protect and enforce the rights described in its complaint.
Ruling
Judge John G. Koeltl granted Strike 3 Holdings permission to serve the authorized third-party subpoenas before the Rule 26(f) conference, subject to the stated notice and use restrictions. This discovery order did not resolve the underlying claim against John Doe.
Read the full 2-page opinion on CourtListener, the free public archive maintained by the Free Law Project.