Court, Explained
U.S. Federal District Courts
←Back to docket
S.D.N.Y.Procedural orderFiled Mar. 15, 2022

Strike 3 Holdings, LLC v. Doe

Judge
Nelson Roman
Docket
7:22-cv-01625
Court
U.S. District Court · Southern District of New York
Pages
2
Civil ProcedureDiscovery
In one sentence

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

Who this affects

Strike 3 Holdings, LLC may obtain identifying information about the John Doe defendant from Verizon Fios and potentially other identified internet-service providers, subject to the order’s limits and any required subscriber notice.

What happened

In Strike 3 Holdings, LLC v. John Doe subscriber assigned IP address 108.21.195.222, Strike 3 Holdings asked to serve a subpoena before the parties’ required initial conference. The court found good cause for the request.

The court allowed Strike 3 Holdings to serve Verizon Fios with a subpoena seeking the defendant’s true name and address. It also allowed subpoenas to other internet-service providers identified through those responses.

The information may be used only to protect and enforce Strike 3 Holdings’ rights described in its complaint. Judge Nelson S. Roman also required any cable operator to notify the subscriber by sending a copy of the order.

The detailed version

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

Case
Strike 3 Holdings, LLC v. Doe · No. 7:22-cv-01625
Judge
Nelson Roman
Date
Mar. 15, 2022

Background

Strike 3 Holdings, LLC moved for permission to serve a third-party subpoena before the parties held the conference required by Rule 26(f) of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure. The subpoena would be directed to Verizon Fios, identified in the order as the internet-service provider, and would seek the true name and address of the defendant associated with IP address 108.21.195.222.

Ruling

The court found that Strike 3 Holdings had established good cause to serve the subpoena. It authorized Strike 3 Holdings to serve Verizon Fios with a Rule 45 subpoena requiring Verizon Fios to provide the defendant’s true name and address. A copy of the order must be attached to the subpoena.

The court also authorized 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. If Verizon Fios qualifies as a cable operator under federal law, it must comply with the law requiring subscriber notification by sending the defendant a copy of the order. Strike 3 Holdings may use information disclosed in response to the subpoena only to protect and enforce the rights asserted in its complaint. The clerk was directed to terminate the motion at ECF No. 8.

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.