Strike 3 Holdings, LLC v. Doe
- Philip Halpern
- 7:24-cv-01722
- U.S. District Court · Southern District of New York
- 2
In Strike 3 Holdings v. Doe, Judge Halpern allowed early subpoenas to identify the anonymous internet subscriber.
Strike 3 Holdings, LLC may seek the identity and address of the anonymous John Doe subscriber from Optimum Online and certain other identified internet service providers; the defendant must receive notice if the cable-operator rule applies.
What happened
Strike 3 Holdings, LLC sued an anonymous defendant identified as John Doe and linked to IP address 68.194.177.75. Strike 3 asked to subpoena the internet provider before the parties held their required initial conference.
The court found that Strike 3 had shown good cause and allowed it to serve Optimum Online with a subpoena seeking the defendant’s true name and address. The order also allowed similar subpoenas to other internet service providers identified through the responses. If the provider qualified as a cable operator, it had to send the defendant a copy of the order.
The information could be used only to protect and enforce Strike 3’s rights described in its complaint. Judge Philip M. Halpern issued this discovery order on March 20, 2024; it did not decide the underlying claims.
The detailed version
- Strike 3 Holdings, LLC v. Doe · No. 7:24-cv-01722
- Philip Halpern
- Mar. 20, 2024
Background
Strike 3 Holdings, LLC filed a case against “John Doe,” described as the subscriber assigned Internet Protocol address 68.194.177.75. Strike 3 moved for permission to serve a subpoena on Optimum Online before the parties’ required conference under Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 26(f).
Court’s Analysis and Order
The court found that Strike 3 had established “good cause” for early discovery. It authorized Strike 3 to serve Optimum Online with a subpoena under Rule 45 requiring the provider to disclose the true name and address of the defendant associated with the specified IP address. Strike 3 had to attach a copy of the order to the subpoena.
The court also authorized Strike 3 to serve a similar Rule 45 subpoena on any service provider identified in response to a subpoena as providing internet services to one of the defendants. If Optimum Online qualified as a “cable operator” under 47 U.S.C. § 522(5), the order required it to comply with 47 U.S.C. § 551(c)(2)(B) by sending the defendant a copy of the order.
Limit on Use of Information
Strike 3 could use information disclosed in response to the subpoena served on Optimum Online only to protect and enforce its rights described in the complaint.
Disposition
The court allowed the early third-party subpoenas described in the order. The opinion did not decide the underlying claims or the defendant’s liability. Judge Philip M. Halpern signed the order on March 20, 2024.
Read the full 2-page opinion on CourtListener, the free public archive maintained by the Free Law Project.