Strike 3 Holdings, LLC v. Doe
- Alvin Hellerstein
- 1:22-cv-08789
- U.S. District Court · Southern District of New York
- 6
In Strike 3 Holdings v. Doe, Judge Hellerstein’s court, through Magistrate Judge Cott, granted Strike 3’s request for early discovery of John Doe’s identity.
Strike 3 Holdings, LLC may seek limited identifying information from Spectrum; John Doe receives notice and an opportunity to challenge the subpoena or seek anonymity; Spectrum must preserve and withhold the information according to the order.
What happened
Strike 3 Holdings, LLC sued John Doe in a copyright-infringement case and asked to serve Spectrum, the internet provider, with a subpoena before the usual early case conference. Strike 3 said it needed the information to learn Doe’s name and address from the internet-protocol address linked to the alleged activity.
The court granted the request, relying on its analysis in prior related proceedings. The subpoena may seek only Doe’s name and current or permanent address—not an email address or telephone number. The court also required Spectrum to notify Doe and gave Doe 60 days to challenge the subpoena or ask to remain anonymous.
The court ordered Spectrum to withhold the identifying information until that period ends and any timely challenge is resolved. If no one challenges the subpoena, Spectrum may provide the information within 10 additional days, and Strike 3 may use it only to protect the rights asserted in its complaint. Magistrate Judge James L. Cott issued the order.
The detailed version
- Strike 3 Holdings, LLC v. Doe · No. 1:22-cv-08789
- Alvin Hellerstein
- Nov. 14, 2022
Background
Strike 3 Holdings, LLC brought a copyright-infringement case against John Doe, identified in the caption by the internet-protocol address 69.203.139.233. The notice to the defendant states that Strike 3 alleged Doe illegally downloaded and/or distributed movies, but the opinion does not decide whether that allegation is true.
Strike 3 filed an ex parte request—meaning a request made without advance participation by the opposing party—for permission to serve a subpoena before the parties held the conference ordinarily required early in a case. The requested subpoena would go to Spectrum, the internet service provider identified in Strike 3’s motion, to obtain information that could reveal Doe’s identity.
Court’s Reasoning
The court stated that it had considered the same application by Strike 3 in four prior related proceedings involving different internet-protocol addresses. Instead of repeating that analysis, the court incorporated the reasoning from those proceedings and granted the application for the same reasons.
The court also issued a protective order because of the stated risk of mistaken identifications causing annoyance, embarrassment, oppression, or undue burden or expense. The opinion does not provide the incorporated prior analysis in full.
Order
The court authorized Strike 3 to immediately serve Spectrum with a subpoena under Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 45. The subpoena may request only the name and current and/or permanent address of the subscriber associated with internet-protocol address 69.203.139.233. It may not request additional information, including an email address or telephone number.
Strike 3 must provide Spectrum with the order, the incorporated October 9, 2019 decision, and a notice to the defendant. Spectrum then has 60 days after receiving the subpoena to serve John Doe with those materials. Doe has 60 days after receiving notice from Spectrum to file a motion challenging the subpoena, including a motion to cancel or change it, or to request permission to proceed anonymously. If Doe contests the subpoena, Doe must also notify Spectrum, which must not release the information while the challenge is pending.
Spectrum may not disclose Doe’s identifying information before the 60-day period ends or before the court resolves any timely motion, whichever is later. If neither Doe nor Spectrum contests the subpoena during that period, Spectrum has 10 days to provide the responsive information to Strike 3. Any information disclosed may be used only to protect the rights Strike 3 asserted in its complaint. The clerk was directed to close Docket Number 6 and mark it as granted. Magistrate Judge James L. Cott signed the order.
Read the full 6-page opinion on CourtListener, the free public archive maintained by the Free Law Project.