Court, Explained
U.S. Federal District Courts
←Back to docket
S.D.N.Y.Procedural orderFiled Feb. 10, 2022

Strike 3 Holdings, LLC v. Doe

Judge
Katherine Failla
Docket
1:21-cv-09349
Court
U.S. District Court · Southern District of New York
Pages
2
Civil ProcedureDiscovery
In one sentence

In Strike 3 Holdings v. Doe, Judge Failla allowed early subpoenas to identify the anonymous defendant.

Who this affects

Strike 3 Holdings, LLC, the unidentified defendant associated with IP address 96.232.110.129, Verizon Fios, and any other Internet service provider identified through the authorized subpoenas.

What happened

In Strike 3 Holdings, LLC v. Doe, Strike 3 asked to serve a subpoena on Verizon Fios before the parties held their required early case-management conference. The defendant was identified in the caption only as John Doe, associated with a specified Internet address.

The court found that Strike 3 had shown a legally sufficient reason to seek the information early. It allowed Strike 3 to subpoena Verizon Fios for the defendant’s true name and address and to subpoena other Internet providers identified through those responses. The information could be used only to protect and enforce the rights described in Strike 3’s complaint.

Judge Katherine Polk Failla also required certain notice to the defendant if Verizon Fios qualified as a cable operator, set April 10, 2022, as the deadline for serving the summons and complaint, and directed the Clerk to terminate the pending motions at docket numbers 9 and 11.

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-09349
Judge
Katherine Failla
Date
Feb. 10, 2022

Background

Strike 3 Holdings, LLC moved for permission to serve a third-party subpoena before the parties’ required Rule 26(f) conference. The defendant was identified as “John Doe subscriber assigned IP address 96.232.110.129.” Strike 3 sought information from Verizon Fios, identified as the Internet service provider, to learn the defendant’s true name and address.

Court’s ruling

The court found that Strike 3 had established “good cause,” meaning a sufficient reason, to obtain the information before the normal start of discovery. The court granted permission for Strike 3 to serve Verizon Fios with a subpoena under Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 45. The subpoena could require Verizon Fios to provide the true name and address of the defendant associated with the Internet address listed in the complaint, and Strike 3 had to attach a copy of the order.

The court also allowed Strike 3 to serve the same type of subpoena on any other Internet service provider identified in response to a subpoena. If Verizon Fios qualified as a “cable operator” under federal law, it had to comply with the notice requirement for disclosing personal identifying information by sending a copy of the order to the defendant. Strike 3 could use information obtained through the subpoena only to protect and enforce the rights asserted in its complaint.

Other directives and effect

The court required Strike 3 to serve the summons and complaint on the defendant by April 10, 2022. It directed the Clerk of Court to terminate the pending motions at docket numbers 9 and 11. This order addressed early identification and discovery procedures; it did not decide whether Strike 3 would prevail on the claims in its complaint. Judge Katherine Polk Failla signed the order as a United States District Judge.

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.