Court, Explained
U.S. Federal District Courts
←Back to docket
S.D.N.Y.Procedural orderFiled Jan. 12, 2023

Strike 3 Holdings, LLC v. Doe

Judge
Louis Stanton
Docket
1:22-cv-10697
Court
U.S. District Court · Southern District of New York
Pages
2
DiscoveryCivil Procedure
In one sentence

In Strike 3 Holdings v. Doe, Judge Stanton allowed subpoenas seeking Doe’s identity from the internet provider before the usual discovery conference.

Who this affects

Strike 3 Holdings, LLC may seek John Doe’s identifying information from Spectrum and other identified internet-service providers. John Doe may receive notice if the provider qualifies as a cable operator, and the disclosed information is restricted to enforcement of Strike 3’s rights in this case.

What happened

Strike 3 Holdings, LLC sued John Doe, identified by an internet-protocol address, and asked to subpoena Spectrum before the parties held their usual discovery conference. In Strike 3 Holdings, LLC v. John Doe, the court found good cause for early discovery.

The order allows Strike 3 to serve Spectrum with a subpoena seeking the name and address of the subscriber assigned that internet-protocol address. It also allows similar subpoenas to other internet-service providers identified through the responses. If the provider is a cable operator, it must notify the subscriber by sending a copy of the order.

The information may be used only to protect and enforce Strike 3’s rights in the lawsuit. Judge Louis Stanton issued the order in 2024, but the day and month are unclear in the provided text.

The detailed version

For law students, journalists, and other readers who want the full reasoning

Case
Strike 3 Holdings, LLC v. Doe · No. 1:22-cv-10697
Judge
Louis Stanton
Date
Jan. 12, 2023

Background

Strike 3 Holdings, LLC asked for permission to serve a third-party subpoena on Spectrum before the parties’ required conference about planning discovery under Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 26(f). John Doe is identified in the caption as the subscriber assigned internet-protocol address 184.152.231.187.

Ruling

The court found that Strike 3 established “good cause” to serve the subpoena before the Rule 26(f) conference. The order authorizes Strike 3 to serve Spectrum with a Rule 45 subpoena demanding the true name and address of the defendant to whom Spectrum assigned the internet-protocol address listed in the complaint. A copy of the order must be attached to the subpoena.

The order also authorizes Strike 3 to serve the same type of subpoena on any service provider identified in response to a subpoena as having provided internet services to one of the defendants.

Subscriber notice and use of information

If Spectrum qualifies as a “cable operator” under 47 U.S.C. § 522(5), the order states that it must comply with 47 U.S.C. § 551(c)(2)(B) by sending John Doe a copy of the order. Strike 3 may use information disclosed in response to the subpoena only to protect and enforce its rights asserted in the complaint.

Disposition

The order permits the requested early third-party discovery. The provided text does not use a separate “granted” or “denied” label for the motion. The order’s day and month are not legible in the provided text; it identifies the year as 2024.

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.