Strike 3 Holdings, LLC v. Doe
- Louis Stanton
- 1:22-cv-04729
- U.S. District Court · Southern District of New York
- 2
In Strike 3 Holdings v. Doe, Judge Stanton allowed early subpoenas to identify the John Doe defendant.
Strike 3 Holdings, LLC, John Doe, Spectrum, and any other internet service provider identified through the subpoena process.
What happened
In Strike 3 Holdings, LLC v. Doe, Strike 3 asked for permission to subpoena Spectrum before the parties held their required early case-management conference. The defendant was identified in the caption as John Doe, a subscriber assigned a specified internet address.
The court found that Strike 3 had shown a sufficient reason to issue the subpoena. It allowed Strike 3 to subpoena Spectrum for the defendant’s true name and address and to subpoena other internet providers identified in response. Strike 3 may use the information only to protect and enforce the rights described in its complaint.
Judge Louis Stanton also required additional notice if the provider qualified as a cable operator under federal law. The provider had to send the defendant a copy of the court’s order before disclosing identifying information.
The detailed version
- Strike 3 Holdings, LLC v. Doe · No. 1:22-cv-04729
- Louis Stanton
- June 30, 2022
Background
Strike 3 Holdings, LLC 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). The defendant was identified as John Doe, a subscriber assigned internet-protocol address 67.243.141.223.
Court’s Ruling
The court found that Strike 3 had established “good cause” to serve the subpoena before the Rule 26(f) conference. The court authorized Strike 3 to serve Spectrum with a Rule 45 subpoena requiring Spectrum to provide the defendant’s true name and address. Strike 3 must attach a copy of the order to the subpoena.
The court also authorized Strike 3 to serve the same type of subpoena on another internet service provider identified in response to a subpoena as providing internet services to one of the defendants.
If Spectrum qualifies as a “cable operator” under 47 U.S.C. § 522(5), the order requires it to comply with 47 U.S.C. § 551(c)(2)(B), including by sending the defendant a copy of the order before disclosing personal identifying information. Strike 3 may use information disclosed in response to the subpoena only to protect and enforce the rights described in its complaint.
Effect of the Order
The order permits early discovery aimed at identifying the John Doe defendant. It does not decide the underlying claims described in Strike 3’s complaint.
Read the full 2-page opinion on CourtListener, the free public archive maintained by the Free Law Project.