Strike 3 Holdings, LLC v. Doe
- Philip Halpern
- 7:23-cv-00692
- U.S. District Court · Southern District of New York
- 2
In Strike 3 Holdings v. Doe, Judge Halpern authorized subpoenas seeking the defendant’s name and address from internet providers.
Strike 3 Holdings, LLC, John Doe, Optimum Online, and any other internet service provider identified in response to a subpoena.
What happened
Strike 3 Holdings, LLC sued John Doe, identified in the complaint by an internet address assigned by Optimum Online. The plaintiff asked to subpoena Optimum Online before the parties held their required early case-management meeting.
The court found that the plaintiff had shown good cause to obtain the information. It authorized a subpoena requiring Optimum Online to provide the defendant’s true name and address and allowed similar subpoenas to other internet providers identified in the responses.
The order also required notice to the defendant if Optimum Online qualified as a cable operator and limited use of the information to protecting and enforcing Strike 3 Holdings’ rights described in its complaint. Judge Philip M. Halpern issued the order.
The detailed version
- Strike 3 Holdings, LLC v. Doe · No. 7:23-cv-00692
- Philip Halpern
- Feb. 13, 2023
Background
Strike 3 Holdings, LLC asked for permission to serve a third-party subpoena before the parties’ required Rule 26(f) conference. The defendant was identified in the case caption as John Doe, a subscriber assigned internet protocol address 69.121.161.173. The proposed recipient was Optimum Online, identified as the internet service provider.
Court’s Action
The court determined that Strike 3 Holdings had established “good cause” to serve the subpoena. It authorized Strike 3 Holdings to serve Optimum Online with a Rule 45 subpoena requiring the provider to disclose the defendant’s true name and address. The order requires a copy of the order to be attached to the subpoena.
The court also authorized Strike 3 Holdings to serve the same type of subpoena on any other service provider identified in response as providing internet services to one of the defendants.
Notice and Use Limits
If Optimum Online qualifies as a “cable operator” under 47 U.S.C. § 522(5), the order requires it to comply with the subscriber-notification provision in 47 U.S.C. § 551(c)(2)(B) by sending a copy of the order to the defendant. Strike 3 Holdings may use information disclosed in response to the subpoena only to protect and enforce the rights described in its complaint.
Judge Philip M. Halpern entered the order on February 13, 2023.
Read the full 2-page opinion on CourtListener, the free public archive maintained by the Free Law Project.