Strike 3 Holdings, LLC v. Doe
- Jed Rakoff
- 1:22-cv-01622
- U.S. District Court · Southern District of New York
- 2
In Strike 3 Holdings v. Doe, Judge Rakoff allowed early subpoenas to identify the subscriber linked to an internet address.
Strike 3 Holdings, LLC, the unidentified defendant John Doe, Verizon Fios, and any other service provider identified in response to a subpoena.
What happened
Strike 3 Holdings, LLC sued a person identified as John Doe by an internet address assigned by Verizon Fios. The court considered Strike 3’s request to obtain identifying information before the parties held their required early-case meeting.
The court found good cause for the request and authorized Strike 3 to serve Verizon Fios with a subpoena seeking the defendant’s true name and address. Strike 3 could also subpoena another internet provider identified in response. Verizon Fios had to provide the requested information within 21 days, and any disclosed information could be used only to protect and enforce the rights described in the complaint.
Judge Jed S. Rakoff issued the order. The order addressed early discovery and did not decide the underlying claims or whether the defendant was liable.
The detailed version
- Strike 3 Holdings, LLC v. Doe · No. 1:22-cv-01622
- Jed Rakoff
- Mar. 11, 2022
Background
Strike 3 Holdings, LLC asked for permission to serve a third-party subpoena before the parties’ conference required by Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 26(f). The defendant was identified in the caption as John Doe, a subscriber assigned Internet Protocol address 68.132.243.38. The requested subpoena was directed to Verizon Fios, identified in the order as the internet service provider.
Court’s ruling
The court found that Strike 3 had established “good cause” to seek the information before the Rule 26(f) conference. It authorized Strike 3 to serve Verizon Fios with a subpoena under Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 45 requiring Verizon Fios to provide the defendant’s true name and address. Strike 3 had to attach a copy of the order to the subpoena.
The court also authorized Strike 3 to serve a similar subpoena on any service provider identified in response to a subpoena as providing internet services to one of the defendants. Verizon Fios was ordered to return the requested information within 21 days of the order.
If Verizon Fios qualified as a “cable operator” under 47 U.S.C. § 522(5), the order required compliance with 47 U.S.C. § 551(c)(2)(B), including notifying the subscriber by sending the subscriber a copy of the order. Strike 3 could use information disclosed in response to the subpoena only to protect and enforce the rights described in its complaint.
Effect of the order
This was an early-discovery order. It authorized subpoenas to obtain identifying information, but the opinion did not decide the underlying claims, determine whether the defendant was liable, or make a finding about the defendant’s conduct. Judge Jed S. Rakoff issued the order.
Disposition
The order authorized Strike 3 Holdings, LLC to serve the specified third-party subpoenas before the Rule 26(f) conference, subject to the stated conditions.
Read the full 2-page opinion on CourtListener, the free public archive maintained by the Free Law Project.