Court, Explained
U.S. Federal District Courts
←Back to docket
S.D.N.Y.Procedural orderFiled Jan. 30, 2024

Strike 3 Holdings, LLC v. Doe

Judge
Nelson Roman
Docket
7:23-cv-11233
Court
U.S. District Court · Southern District of New York
Pages
2
DiscoveryCivil Procedure
In one sentence

In Strike 3 Holdings v. Doe, Judge Roman allowed subpoenas seeking Doe’s identifying information before the usual discovery conference.

Who this affects

Strike 3 Holdings, LLC may seek John Doe’s identifying information from Optimum Online and qualifying service providers through authorized subpoenas. John Doe must be notified if the provider is a cable operator, and the information may be used only for the purposes stated in the order.

What happened

Strike 3 Holdings, LLC sued John Doe, identified by an internet address, and asked to subpoena Optimum Online before the parties’ required discovery conference. The court found that Strike 3 had shown a sufficient reason to do so.

The order allows Strike 3 to subpoena Optimum Online for Doe’s true name and address. It also allows subpoenas to other internet providers identified through those responses. Any subpoena must include a copy of the order.

Judge Nelson Roman also required notice to Doe if the provider is a cable operator and limited use of the information to protecting and enforcing the rights described in Strike 3’s complaint. The order did not decide the underlying claims.

The detailed version

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

Case
Strike 3 Holdings, LLC v. Doe · No. 7:23-cv-11233
Judge
Nelson Roman
Date
Jan. 30, 2024

Background

Strike 3 Holdings, LLC asked for permission to serve a third-party subpoena before the parties’ required conference about preparing the case. The defendant is identified in the caption as John Doe, a subscriber assigned internet address 47.18.93.164. The proposed subpoena was directed to Optimum Online, identified as the internet service provider.

Court’s Analysis

The court found that Strike 3 had established “good cause” to serve the subpoena before the conference. The order authorized a subpoena under Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 45 seeking the defendant’s true name and address. The subpoena must include a copy of the order.

The order also permits Strike 3 to serve the same type of subpoena on another internet service provider identified in response as providing internet services to one of the defendants. If Optimum Online qualifies as a cable operator under 47 U.S.C. § 522(5), it must comply with the notice requirement in 47 U.S.C. § 551(c)(2)(B) by sending Doe a copy of the order.

Ruling

Judge Nelson Roman granted Strike 3 permission to serve the authorized third-party subpoenas before the Rule 26(f) conference. The information obtained may be used only to protect and enforce Strike 3’s rights described in its complaint. The order addressed early discovery and did not decide the underlying claims against John Doe.

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.