Strike 3 Holdings, LLC v. Doe
- Gregory Woods
- 1:22-cv-05853
- U.S. District Court · Southern District of New York
- 3
In Strike 3 Holdings v. Doe, Judge Woods granted early discovery allowing a subpoena to identify the subscriber linked to the listed internet address.
Strike 3 Holdings LLC may seek the subscriber’s name and address from Spectrum. Spectrum and the identified subscriber received deadlines and procedures for objecting to or seeking to cancel the subpoena, and any produced information is subject to use and disclosure restrictions.
What happened
Strike 3 Holdings LLC asked to serve a subpoena before the parties held their required discovery-planning conference. The subpoena seeks the name and address of the subscriber associated with IP address 74.64.57.133, identified in the case as John Doe.
The court found that Strike 3 met the required reasonableness and good-cause standard, including the heightened scrutiny required because the request was made without notifying the other side. The court allowed Strike 3 to serve the subpoena on Spectrum and set deadlines for Spectrum and the identified subscriber to object or ask that the subpoena be canceled.
Judge Woods granted Strike 3’s motion for permission to serve the early subpoena. The court said this order did not decide the merits of any later request to cancel the subpoena and restricted use and disclosure of information produced under it.
The detailed version
- Strike 3 Holdings, LLC v. Doe · No. 1:22-cv-05853
- Gregory Woods
- Aug. 3, 2022
Background
Strike 3 Holdings LLC sought permission to obtain information about the subscriber assigned IP address 74.64.57.133. It asked to serve a subpoena on Spectrum before the parties had held the discovery-planning conference required by Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 26(f), and it made the request without notifying the other side.
Court’s analysis
Rule 26(d) generally bars a party from seeking discovery before the Rule 26(f) conference unless a court authorizes early discovery. The court applied a flexible reasonableness-and-good-cause test, with especially careful review because Strike 3 sought both early discovery and permission to proceed without notice.
The court noted that Strike 3 relied on a test from an earlier case concerning whether to preserve an objecting party’s anonymity when challenging a subpoena. The court emphasized that anonymity and the merits of any future motion to cancel the subpoena were not before it, and that the order should not be understood as deciding those issues. The court nevertheless found that Strike 3 met the reasonableness and good-cause standard.
Order
The court granted Strike 3’s motion for permission to serve a third-party subpoena before the Rule 26(f) conference. Strike 3 may serve Spectrum with a subpoena under Rule 45 seeking the name and address of the subscriber associated with IP address 74.64.57.133, and its lawyer must attach the order to the subpoena.
Spectrum must reasonably attempt to identify the subscriber within seven days after receiving the subpoena and give the subscriber a copy of the subpoena and order. If Spectrum cannot identify the subscriber with a reasonable degree of technical certainty, it must notify Strike 3’s lawyer. Spectrum has 21 days after service to move to cancel or otherwise object to the subpoena. The identified subscriber has 14 days after receiving the subpoena from Spectrum to do the same. If no objection or motion is filed, Spectrum must produce the requested information within 21 days after notifying the subscriber.
Strike 3 may use the information only to protect and enforce the rights described in its complaint. The court also ordered that the information not be disclosed to anyone other than Strike 3 and its lawyer without further court permission. The clerk was directed to terminate the motion at docket number 7.
Read the full 3-page opinion on CourtListener, the free public archive maintained by the Free Law Project.