Court, Explained
U.S. Federal District Courts
←Back to docket
S.D.N.Y.Procedural orderFiled June 22, 2022

Strike 3 Holdings, LLC v. Doe

Judge
Vincent Briccetti
Docket
7:22-cv-04772
Court
U.S. District Court · Southern District of New York
Pages
2
DiscoveryCivil Procedure
In one sentence

In Strike 3 Holdings v. Doe, Judge Briccetti allowed subpoenas to identify the defendant linked to an internet address.

Who this affects

Strike 3 Holdings, LLC may seek the identity and address of the John Doe defendant from Comcast and other identified internet service providers. The defendant and any affected subscriber may receive notice, and providers must follow the order’s disclosure requirements if applicable.

What happened

Strike 3 Holdings, LLC sued John Doe, identified by an internet address, and asked to subpoena Comcast before the parties held their required early case meeting. The company argued that it had good cause to obtain information identifying the defendant.

The court granted permission to serve Comcast with a subpoena seeking the defendant’s true name and address. The court also allowed subpoenas to other internet providers identified through that process.

Judge Vincent Briccetti ordered that any cable provider notify the subscriber of the order and that Strike 3 use the information only to protect and enforce the rights described in its complaint.

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-04772
Judge
Vincent Briccetti
Date
June 22, 2022

Background

Strike 3 Holdings, LLC sued a defendant identified in the complaint as John Doe subscriber assigned IP address 67.189.201.88. Strike 3 moved for permission to serve a third-party subpoena before the parties’ Rule 26(f) conference, the early meeting at which parties generally discuss the case and discovery.

Ruling

The court found that Strike 3 had established good cause to serve Comcast Cable, identified as the internet service provider. The court authorized Strike 3 to serve a Rule 45 subpoena requiring Comcast to provide the true name and address of the defendant to whom it assigned the internet address listed in the complaint. Strike 3 must attach a copy of the order to the subpoena.

The court also authorized Strike 3 to serve a similar Rule 45 subpoena on any service provider identified in response to a subpoena as providing internet services to one of the defendants.

Subscriber notice and use of information

If Comcast qualifies as a cable operator under 47 U.S.C. § 522(5), the court stated that it must comply with 47 U.S.C. § 551(c)(2)(B), which permits disclosure of personal identifying information under a court order when the subscriber is notified by the person receiving the order. The order therefore requires the provider to send a copy of the order to the defendant. Strike 3 may use information disclosed in response to the subpoena only to protect and enforce the rights described in its complaint.

Disposition

Judge Vincent Briccetti granted Strike 3 Holdings, LLC permission to serve the authorized third-party subpoenas before the Rule 26(f) conference, subject to the stated notice and use restrictions.

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.