Strike 3 Holdings, LLC v. Doe
- Lorna Schofield
- 1:20-cv-10740
- U.S. District Court · Southern District of New York
- 2
In Strike 3 Holdings v. Doe, Judge Schofield authorized limited expedited discovery to identify and serve the anonymous defendant.
Strike 3 Holdings, LLC, John Doe, Verizon Internet Services, and any other Internet service provider identified through the authorized subpoena process.
What happened
In Strike 3 Holdings, LLC v. John Doe, the plaintiff asked to subpoena Verizon Internet Services for information identifying the defendant, who was associated with a listed Internet address. The plaintiff said it could not identify or serve the defendant without this discovery.
The court authorized the plaintiff to serve Verizon with a subpoena seeking only the defendant’s name and address. The information could be used only to identify and serve the defendant, and the plaintiff had to serve Verizon with the order and subpoena and file proof of service by January 11, 2021.
Judge Lorna G. Schofield also allowed similar subpoenas to other Internet service providers identified through the process, subject to specified notice requirements for certain cable operators. The court waived the required pre-motion letter and directed the Clerk to close docket entry number 6.
The detailed version
- Strike 3 Holdings, LLC v. Doe · No. 1:20-cv-10740
- Lorna Schofield
- Dec. 30, 2020
Background
Strike 3 Holdings, LLC moved under Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 26(d)(1) for permission to conduct expedited discovery before the parties’ required initial conference. It sought to serve a Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 45 subpoena on third-party Verizon Internet Services to identify John Doe, the subscriber assigned the Internet Protocol address 70.18.16.134.
Court’s Analysis
The court applied a flexible reasonableness-and-good-cause standard for expedited discovery before the initial conference. It found that the plaintiff satisfied the requirements for such discovery because it appeared unable otherwise to identify the defendant or serve him.
Order
The court authorized Strike 3 Holdings to serve Verizon with a Rule 45 subpoena seeking only the defendant’s name and address. The plaintiff could not seek the defendant’s email address, telephone number, or other information through that subpoena. Any information disclosed could be used only to obtain enough information to identify and serve the defendant.
The court required the plaintiff to serve Verizon with a copy of the order and subpoena and file an affidavit of service by January 11, 2021. It also authorized the plaintiff to serve a similar subpoena on any Internet service provider identified as providing Internet service to the defendant. If that provider qualified as a cable operator under 47 U.S.C. § 522(5), it had to comply with the notice requirement in 47 U.S.C. § 551(c)(2)(B) by sending the defendant a copy of the order. The court waived the pre-motion-letter requirement in its individual rules and directed the Clerk to close docket entry number 6.
Read the full 2-page opinion on CourtListener, the free public archive maintained by the Free Law Project.