Court, Explained
U.S. Federal District Courts
←Back to docket
S.D.N.Y.Procedural orderFiled May 19, 2021

Strike 3 Holdings, LLC v. Doe

Judge
Analisa Torres
Docket
1:21-cv-04080
Court
U.S. District Court · Southern District of New York
Pages
2
DiscoveryCivil Procedure
In one sentence

In Strike 3 Holdings v. Doe, Judge Wang allowed Strike 3 to subpoena Verizon Fios for the defendant’s name and address before the required conference.

Who this affects

Strike 3 Holdings, LLC may seek John Doe’s name and address from Verizon Fios and potentially other identified internet-service providers. John Doe may receive notice if the federal cable-operator disclosure rule applies.

What happened

Strike 3 Holdings, LLC sued John Doe, identified by an internet address, and asked to subpoena Verizon Fios before the parties held their required early-case conference. Strike 3 said it needed the information to identify the defendant.

The court found good cause and allowed Strike 3 to serve a subpoena requiring Verizon Fios to provide the defendant’s true name and address. The order also permits subpoenas to other internet providers identified through that process.

Judge Ona T. Wang limited use of the information to protecting and enforcing Strike 3’s claims. If Verizon Fios qualifies as a cable operator, it must notify the defendant by sending a copy of the order before disclosing identifying information.

The detailed version

For law students, journalists, and other readers who want the full reasoning

Case
Strike 3 Holdings, LLC v. Doe · No. 1:21-cv-04080
Judge
Analisa Torres
Date
May 19, 2021

Background

Strike 3 Holdings, LLC sued John Doe, identifying the defendant by the internet protocol address 173.56.86.169. Strike 3 asked for permission to serve Verizon Fios with a subpoena before the Rule 26(f) conference, the required early meeting in which parties generally discuss the case and discovery.

Ruling

The court found that Strike 3 had shown “good cause” to seek the information. It authorized Strike 3 to serve Verizon Fios with a Rule 45 subpoena, a formal demand for information issued in connection with a federal case, requiring Verizon Fios to provide the true name and address of the defendant assigned the specified internet address. Strike 3 must attach the order to the subpoena.

The order also authorizes Strike 3 to serve the same type of subpoena on any other internet-service provider identified in response to a subpoena as having provided internet service to one of the defendants.

Privacy and Use Restrictions

If Verizon Fios qualifies as a cable operator under federal law, it may disclose identifying information pursuant to the court’s order only if the defendant is notified of the order by the person to whom the order was directed. The order instructs Strike 3 to send a copy to the defendant. Strike 3 may use information obtained through the subpoena only to protect and enforce the rights asserted in its complaint.

Disposition

The court authorized the requested pre-conference subpoenas and imposed the stated notice and-use limitations. The order was signed by Judge Ona T. Wang.

The authoritative version

Read the full 2-page opinion on CourtListener, the free public archive maintained by the Free Law Project.

Open opinion PDF →
Summary written with AI assistance. See how summaries are made. Spot something wrong? Tell us.