Strike 3 Holdings, LLC v. Doe
- Paul Crotty
- 1:21-cv-09350
- U.S. District Court · Southern District of New York
- 2
In Strike 3 Holdings v. Doe, Judge Crotty allowed a subpoena to identify the subscriber behind an internet address before normal discovery began.
Strike 3 Holdings, LLC may seek the defendant’s identifying information from Verizon Fios and potentially other identified internet service providers. The defendant must receive a copy of the order if the applicable cable-privacy provision requires it.
What happened
Strike 3 Holdings, LLC v. Doe concerns the plaintiff’s request to subpoena Verizon Fios before the parties held the required early case meeting. The defendant was identified in the complaint as the subscriber assigned a particular internet address.
The court found good cause for early discovery. It allowed Strike 3 Holdings to serve a subpoena seeking the defendant’s true name and address and to subpoena other internet providers identified in response. If required by federal cable-privacy law, the provider must send the defendant a copy of the order.
Judge Paul Crotty also limited use of the information to protecting and enforcing the plaintiff’s rights described in the complaint. This order addressed discovery and identification of the defendant; it did not decide the underlying claims.
The detailed version
- Strike 3 Holdings, LLC v. Doe · No. 1:21-cv-09350
- Paul Crotty
- Nov. 19, 2021
Background
Strike 3 Holdings, LLC asked for permission to serve a third-party subpoena on Verizon Fios before the parties held a Rule 26(f) conference, the early meeting in which parties generally discuss the case and discovery. The defendant was identified in the complaint as “John Doe subscriber assigned IP address 71.105.143.157.”
Ruling
The court found that Strike 3 Holdings had established “good cause” for early discovery. It allowed the plaintiff to serve Verizon Fios with a subpoena under Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 45 seeking the true name and address of the defendant to whom the identified internet address was assigned. The plaintiff must attach a copy of the order to the subpoena.
The court also allowed Strike 3 Holdings to serve the same type of subpoena on any service provider identified in response as providing internet services to one of the defendants.
Privacy and Use Limits
If Verizon Fios qualifies as a “cable operator” under 47 U.S.C. § 522(5), the order states that it must comply with 47 U.S.C. § 551 by sending a copy of the order to the defendant when disclosing the identifying information. The plaintiff may use information disclosed in response to the subpoena only to protect and enforce the rights described in the complaint.
Effect of the Order
This was an early-discovery order. The court did not decide the underlying claims or determine whether the defendant was liable.
Read the full 2-page opinion on CourtListener, the free public archive maintained by the Free Law Project.