Strike 3 Holdings, LLC v. Doe
- Sidney Stein
- 1:21-cv-01847
- U.S. District Court · Southern District of New York
- 2
In Strike 3 Holdings v. Doe, Judge Stein allowed an early subpoena seeking the subscriber’s name and address from Verizon Fios.
Strike 3 Holdings, LLC may subpoena Verizon Fios for the name and address of the person assigned the listed internet address; the defendant may receive notice if the statutory cable-operator provision applies.
What happened
In Strike 3 Holdings, LLC v. John Doe, Strike 3 asked to serve Verizon Fios with a subpoena before the parties held the conference normally required at the start of a federal case. The subpoena sought information identifying the person assigned to the internet address listed in the complaint.
The court found good cause for the early subpoena and allowed Strike 3 to seek the defendant’s true name and address. If Verizon Fios is a cable operator, it must notify the subscriber by sending the subscriber a copy of the court’s order.
Judge Sidney H. Stein limited Strike 3’s use of the information to protecting and enforcing the rights asserted in its complaint.
The detailed version
- Strike 3 Holdings, LLC v. Doe · No. 1:21-cv-01847
- Sidney Stein
- Mar. 11, 2021
Background
Strike 3 Holdings, LLC asked for permission to serve Verizon Fios with a subpoena 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 address 71.105.211.186, as identified in the complaint.
Ruling
The court found that Strike 3 had shown “good cause” for serving the subpoena early. It authorized Strike 3 to serve Verizon Fios with a Rule 45 subpoena requiring the internet service provider to provide the defendant’s true name and address. Strike 3 must attach a copy of the order to the subpoena.
The order further states that, 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 the defendant a copy of the order as notice of the requested disclosure. Strike 3 may use information disclosed in response to the subpoena only to protect and enforce the rights asserted in its complaint.
Effect of the Order
This was an early-discovery order concerning identification of the defendant. The opinion did not decide the underlying claims in the complaint.
Read the full 2-page opinion on CourtListener, the free public archive maintained by the Free Law Project.