Strike 3 Holdings, LLC v. Doe
- Nelson Roman
- 7:21-cv-10868
- U.S. District Court · Southern District of New York
- 2
In Strike 3 Holdings v. Doe, Judge Roman allowed early discovery to identify an unnamed subscriber through an internet-service subpoena.
Strike 3 Holdings, LLC, the unnamed John Doe subscriber assigned Internet Protocol address 24.46.31.226, Optimum Online, and any later-identified Internet service provider subject to a subpoena.
What happened
Strike 3 Holdings, LLC sued a John Doe subscriber associated with Internet Protocol address 24.46.31.226 and asked to subpoena the subscriber’s Internet service provider before the parties’ required initial meeting.
The court found good cause to allow the subpoena. Strike 3 may ask Optimum Online for the defendant’s true name and address and may subpoena later-identified Internet service providers in the same way.
The order limits use of the disclosed information to protecting and enforcing Strike 3’s rights in the complaint. If the provider is a cable operator, it must notify the subscriber by sending a copy of the order. Judge Roman directed the clerk to terminate the motion.
The detailed version
- Strike 3 Holdings, LLC v. Doe · No. 7:21-cv-10868
- Nelson Roman
- Jan. 12, 2022
Background
Strike 3 Holdings, LLC sued a John Doe subscriber assigned Internet Protocol address 24.46.31.226. Strike 3 asked for permission to serve a subpoena on Optimum Online before the parties held the conference required by Rule 26(f) of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure. The opinion does not describe the underlying claims beyond referring to the rights asserted in the complaint.
Court’s Analysis
The court found that Strike 3 had shown “good cause” for early discovery. Early discovery allows a party to obtain information before the normal discovery schedule begins. The court relied on Second Circuit and Southern District of New York decisions concerning subpoenas seeking to identify an unnamed defendant.
Order
The court authorized Strike 3 to serve Optimum Online with a Rule 45 subpoena demanding the true name and address of the defendant to whom the Internet service provider assigned the identified Internet Protocol address. Strike 3 must attach a copy of the order to the subpoena.
The court also authorized Strike 3 to serve the same type of subpoena on any service provider identified in response to a subpoena as providing Internet service to one of the defendants. Strike 3 may use information disclosed in response to the subpoena only to protect and enforce the rights asserted in its complaint.
If Optimum Online 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 notifying the subscriber of the court order when disclosing personal identifying information. The clerk was directed to terminate the motion at ECF No. 7.
Read the full 2-page opinion on CourtListener, the free public archive maintained by the Free Law Project.