Strike 3 Holdings, LLC v. Doe
- Nelson Roman
- 7:24-cv-01721
- U.S. District Court · Southern District of New York
- 2
In Strike 3 Holdings v. Doe, Judge Roman allowed subpoenas seeking the identity and address of the subscriber assigned the listed internet address.
Strike 3 Holdings, LLC may seek John Doe’s name and address from Optimum Online and potentially other identified internet-service providers. John Doe may receive notice if the provider qualifies as a cable operator, and the information disclosed may be used only for the purposes stated in the order.
What happened
Strike 3 Holdings, LLC asked to serve a subpoena before the parties held their required early case-management conference. The subpoena would seek information identifying John Doe, the subscriber assigned internet address 24.189.250.174.
The court found good cause and allowed Strike 3 Holdings to subpoena Optimum Online for John Doe’s true name and address. The company may also subpoena another internet-service provider identified through that process.
The order requires certain notice to the subscriber if the provider qualifies as a cable operator and limits use of the disclosed information to protecting and enforcing Strike 3 Holdings’ rights described in its complaint. Judge Nelson Roman issued the order.
The detailed version
- Strike 3 Holdings, LLC v. Doe · No. 7:24-cv-01721
- Nelson Roman
- Mar. 25, 2024
Background
Strike 3 Holdings, LLC asked for permission to serve a third-party subpoena before the parties’ conference required by Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 26(f). The defendant is identified as John Doe, the subscriber assigned internet protocol address 24.189.250.174. The opinion does not describe the underlying claims in detail.
Court’s ruling
The court found that Strike 3 Holdings established “good cause” to serve a subpoena on Optimum Online, identified as the internet service provider. The order permits Strike 3 Holdings to serve a subpoena under Rule 45 requiring Optimum Online to provide the defendant’s true name and address. A copy of the order must be attached to the subpoena.
The order also permits Strike 3 Holdings to serve the same type of subpoena on any other internet-service provider identified in response to a subpoena as having provided 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 47 U.S.C. § 551(c)(2)(B). Under that provision, the provider may disclose personal identifying information pursuant to a court order authorizing disclosure if the subscriber is notified of the order by the person receiving it. The order directs this notification by sending a copy of the order to the defendant.
Limits on disclosure
Strike 3 Holdings may use information disclosed in response to the subpoena served on Optimum Online only to protect and enforce the rights described in its complaint.
Disposition
The court’s order allows the requested pre-conference subpoenas under the stated conditions. It does not decide the underlying claims or determine the defendant’s liability.
Read the full 2-page opinion on CourtListener, the free public archive maintained by the Free Law Project.