Strike 3 Holdings, LLC v. Doe
- Kenneth Karas
- 7:22-cv-01628
- U.S. District Court · Southern District of New York
- 2
In Strike 3 Holdings v. John Doe, Judge Karas allowed early subpoenas to identify the defendant and limited use of the disclosed information.
Strike 3 Holdings, LLC may seek John Doe’s identifying information from Spectrum and potentially other identified Internet service providers. John Doe may receive notice if the disclosure provisions for cable operators apply, and the information may be used only for the purposes specified by the court.
What happened
Strike 3 Holdings, LLC sued John Doe, identified by an Internet Protocol address, and asked to subpoena Spectrum before the parties' required early case meeting.
The court found good cause for the early subpoena. It authorized Strike 3 Holdings to seek John Doe's true name and address from Spectrum and, if identified, from other Internet service providers.
Judge Kenneth M. Karas required any cable operator to notify John Doe of the order and limited use of the information to protecting and enforcing the rights described in the complaint. The order did not decide the underlying dispute.
The detailed version
- Strike 3 Holdings, LLC v. Doe · No. 7:22-cv-01628
- Kenneth Karas
- Mar. 18, 2022
Background
Strike 3 Holdings, LLC sued John Doe, identifying the defendant as the subscriber assigned Internet Protocol address 67.254.206.107. Strike 3 Holdings asked for permission to serve a third-party subpoena on Spectrum before the parties held the conference required by Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 26(f).
Ruling
The court found that Strike 3 Holdings had shown “good cause” for early discovery. It authorized Strike 3 Holdings to serve Spectrum with a subpoena under Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 45 requiring Spectrum to provide the defendant’s true name and address. A copy of the order had to 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 to a subpoena as providing Internet services to one of the defendants.
If Spectrum qualified as a cable operator under 47 U.S.C. § 522(5), the court required it to follow 47 U.S.C. § 551(c)(2)(B) by sending John Doe a copy of the order before disclosing personal identifying information.
Limits on Disclosure
Strike 3 Holdings could use information disclosed in response to a subpoena served on Spectrum only to protect and enforce the rights described in its complaint.
Effect of the Order
This was an early-discovery order. It authorized steps to identify John Doe but did not decide the underlying dispute or establish whether either party ultimately would prevail.
Read the full 2-page opinion on CourtListener, the free public archive maintained by the Free Law Project.