Strike 3 Holdings, LLC v. Doe
- Kenneth Karas
- 7:23-cv-09639
- U.S. District Court · Southern District of New York
- 2
In Strike 3 Holdings v. Doe, Judge Karas authorized an early subpoena to identify the anonymous defendant.
Strike 3 Holdings, LLC, the anonymous defendant identified by the listed internet protocol address, Verizon Fios, and any other internet service provider identified through the subpoena process.
What happened
Strike 3 Holdings, LLC sued an anonymous defendant identified in the complaint by an internet address assigned by Verizon Fios. The opinion does not describe the underlying claims in detail.
Strike 3 asked to subpoena Verizon Fios before the parties held their required initial conference. The court found good cause and allowed Strike 3 to seek the defendant’s true name and address. The order also permits subpoenas to other internet providers identified through that process.
Judge Kenneth Karas ordered that any cable operator must notify the subscriber by sending a copy of the order. Strike 3 may use information obtained through the subpoena only to protect and enforce the rights described in its complaint.
The detailed version
- Strike 3 Holdings, LLC v. Doe · No. 7:23-cv-09639
- Kenneth Karas
- Jan. 25, 2024
Background
Strike 3 Holdings, LLC sued John Doe, whose identity was stated through an internet protocol address assigned by Verizon Fios. The opinion does not explain the underlying claims beyond referring to the rights asserted in Strike 3’s complaint.
Motion and Legal Standard
Strike 3 moved for permission to serve Verizon Fios with a Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 45 subpoena before the parties’ Rule 26(f) conference. A subpoena is a legal demand for information or documents. The court applied a “good cause” standard and cited Second Circuit and Southern District of New York decisions concerning early subpoenas used to identify anonymous defendants.
Ruling
The court found that Strike 3 had established good cause. It authorized Strike 3 to serve Verizon Fios with a Rule 45 subpoena 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 court also authorized 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.
If Verizon Fios qualifies as a “cable operator” under 47 U.S.C. § 522(5), it must comply with 47 U.S.C. § 551(c)(2)(B) by notifying the subscriber of the order through a copy of the order. Strike 3 may use information disclosed in response to the subpoena only to protect and enforce the rights stated in its complaint.
Read the full 2-page opinion on CourtListener, the free public archive maintained by the Free Law Project.