Strike 3 Holdings, LLC v. Doe
- John Koeltl
- 1:23-cv-08565
- U.S. District Court · Southern District of New York
- 4
In Strike 3 Holdings v. Doe, Judge Koeltl allowed subpoenas seeking the Doe defendant’s name and address before a Rule 26(f) conference.
Strike 3 Holdings, LLC, the John Doe defendant associated with IP address 98.14.72.218, Spectrum, and any other service provider identified in response to a subpoena.
What happened
In Strike 3 Holdings, LLC v. Doe, Strike 3 asked for permission to subpoena Spectrum before the parties held a Rule 26(f) conference. The defendant was identified in the case by an internet address.
The court found that Strike 3 had shown good cause to seek information identifying the defendant. The order allows Strike 3 to subpoena Spectrum for the defendant’s true name and address and to subpoena another internet service provider identified in a response as serving the defendant.
The order also requires certain notice if Spectrum qualifies as a cable operator and limits Strike 3’s use of the information to protecting and enforcing the rights described in its complaint. Judge John Koeltl issued the order.
The detailed version
- Strike 3 Holdings, LLC v. Doe · No. 1:23-cv-08565
- John Koeltl
- Oct. 16, 2023
Background
Strike 3 Holdings, LLC moved for permission to serve a third-party subpoena before the parties’ Rule 26(f) conference. The proposed subpoena would be directed to Spectrum, identified in the order as the internet service provider, and would seek the true name and address of the defendant associated with the internet address listed in the complaint.
Ruling
The court found that Strike 3 had established “good cause” to serve the subpoena. The order permits Strike 3 to serve Spectrum with a subpoena under Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 45 seeking 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 any service provider identified in response to a subpoena as providing internet services to one of the defendants.
Notice and Use Restrictions
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), which permits disclosure of personal identifying information under a court order when the subscriber is notified of the order by the person receiving it. The order further limits Strike 3’s use of information disclosed in response to a Rule 45 subpoena to protecting and enforcing the rights described in its complaint.
Read the full 4-page opinion on CourtListener, the free public archive maintained by the Free Law Project.