Strike 3 Holdings, LLC v. Doe
- Kenneth Karas
- 7:24-cv-02332
- U.S. District Court · Southern District of New York
- 2
In Strike 3 Holdings v. Doe, Judge Karas granted Plaintiff’s request to seek early discovery to identify the anonymous defendant and delay scheduling.
Strike 3 Holdings, LLC may pursue a motion for early discovery from Verizon Fios to identify the Doe defendant. The unidentified defendant’s identity and the scheduling of the case are affected, but the order does not decide liability.
What happened
Strike 3 Holdings, LLC sued an unidentified defendant, known only by an Internet Protocol address, alleging copyright infringement through the BitTorrent file-sharing network. The plaintiff said Verizon Fios could use its records to identify the subscriber associated with that address.
The plaintiff asked for permission to file a motion seeking a subpoena to Verizon Fios before the parties’ required early discovery conference. It also asked the court to postpone, or not schedule, the initial case-management conference until the defendant was identified and served.
The court granted the request. The order did not itself authorize the subpoena or decide whether copyright infringement occurred. Judge Kenneth M. Karas issued the ruling.
The detailed version
- Strike 3 Holdings, LLC v. Doe · No. 7:24-cv-02332
- Kenneth Karas
- Apr. 9, 2024
Background
Strike 3 Holdings, LLC sued a John Doe defendant for alleged copyright infringement. The opinion states that the defendant’s name and address were unknown and that the defendant was identified only by an Internet Protocol (IP) address. Strike 3 said the defendant used the BitTorrent file-distribution network to infringe its copyrighted works.
The plaintiff identified Verizon Fios as the internet service provider that could potentially connect the IP address to a customer. Strike 3 stated that internet service providers maintain logs showing the customer assigned to an IP address at a particular date and time, but that those logs may be kept only for a short period.
Request
Under Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 26(d)(1), discovery generally cannot begin before the parties hold a Rule 26(f) conference unless the court permits it. Strike 3 asked for permission to file a motion seeking leave to serve a third-party subpoena on Verizon Fios before that conference. The proposed discovery was intended to identify the Doe defendant.
Strike 3 also asked the court to postpone any initial Rule 16 scheduling conference, or not schedule one, until the defendant was identified and served. The plaintiff represented that its anticipated motion would address the factors courts commonly consider when allowing early discovery in internet copyright cases, including a preliminary showing of infringement, a specific discovery request, the lack of another way to obtain the information, the importance of the information, and the defendant’s limited expectation of privacy.
Ruling
The court granted the plaintiff’s request. The text states only “Granted,” so it does not provide a separate explanation or specify additional conditions. The ruling permitted Strike 3 to proceed with its request to file a motion for early third-party discovery and granted the related scheduling request. It did not itself authorize service of the subpoena, identify the defendant, or resolve the copyright-infringement claims.
Read the full 2-page opinion on CourtListener, the free public archive maintained by the Free Law Project.