Strike 3 Holdings, LLC v. Doe
- Andrew Carter
- 1:23-cv-02191
- U.S. District Court · Southern District of New York
- 2
In Strike 3 Holdings v. Doe, Judge Carter allowed early subpoenas to identify the subscriber assigned to an internet address.
Strike 3 Holdings, LLC may seek the defendant’s name and address from Verizon Fios and certain other identified internet service providers. John Doe may receive notice if the cable-operator disclosure provision applies.
What happened
In Strike 3 Holdings, LLC v. John Doe, Strike 3 Holdings asked for permission to serve a subpoena before the parties held their required early case-management meeting.
The court allowed Strike 3 to subpoena Verizon Fios for the name and address of the defendant connected to the internet address listed in the complaint. Strike 3 may also subpoena another internet provider identified through that process. The order requires certain notice to the defendant and limits use of the information to protecting and enforcing Strike 3’s rights in the complaint.
Judge Andrew Carter found that Strike 3 had shown good cause for the early subpoena and entered the order on April 3, 2023. This was a discovery-related order, not a decision on the underlying claims.
The detailed version
- Strike 3 Holdings, LLC v. Doe · No. 1:23-cv-02191
- Andrew Carter
- Apr. 3, 2023
Background
Strike 3 Holdings, LLC moved for permission to serve a third-party subpoena before the parties’ conference required by Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 26(f). The complaint identifies the defendant as John Doe, a subscriber assigned internet protocol address 173.56.64.208.
Court’s Order
The court found that Strike 3 had established “good cause” to serve Verizon Fios, identified in the order as the internet service provider. The order permits Strike 3 to serve a subpoena under Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 45 requiring Verizon Fios to provide the defendant’s true name and address. Strike 3 must attach a copy of the order to the subpoena.
The order also permits 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 Verizon Fios qualifies as a cable operator under 47 U.S.C. § 522(5), the order requires it to follow 47 U.S.C. § 551(c)(2)(B), including sending the defendant a copy of the order as notice of the authorized disclosure. Strike 3 may use information produced in response to the subpoena only to protect and enforce its rights stated in the complaint.
Disposition and Classification
Judge Andrew Carter authorized the early third-party subpoenas after finding good cause. The order addresses discovery and identification of the defendant; it does not decide the underlying claims. It is therefore classified as a procedural order.
Read the full 2-page opinion on CourtListener, the free public archive maintained by the Free Law Project.