Strike 3 Holdings, LLC v. Doe
- Gregory Woods
- 1:24-cv-02521
- U.S. District Court · Southern District of New York
- 3
In Strike 3 Holdings v. Doe, Judge Woods granted early discovery allowing a subpoena to identify the subscriber behind an internet address.
Strike 3 Holdings, LLC may subpoena Verizon Fios for the name and address of the subscriber associated with the specified IP address. John Doe and Verizon Fios receive rights and deadlines to object to or challenge the subpoena.
What happened
Strike 3 Holdings, LLC sued John Doe, identified in the case by an internet address. Before the parties held their required initial conference, Strike 3 asked to subpoena Verizon Fios for the subscriber’s name and address.
The court applied a standard requiring reasonableness and good cause, with especially careful review because Strike 3 sought discovery early and without first notifying the other side. The court found that Strike 3 met that standard.
Judge Gregory H. Woods granted Strike 3’s motion. Verizon Fios may be subpoenaed and must try to identify and notify the subscriber, while the subscriber and Verizon Fios may object or ask to cancel the subpoena within specified deadlines. The information may be used only to protect and enforce Strike 3’s rights in the complaint and may not be disclosed further without court permission.
The detailed version
- Strike 3 Holdings, LLC v. Doe · No. 1:24-cv-02521
- Gregory Woods
- Apr. 10, 2024
Background
Strike 3 Holdings, LLC sued John Doe, who is identified in the caption by subscriber IP address 74.101.204.247. Strike 3 moved for permission to seek discovery from Verizon Fios before the parties’ required conference under Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 26(f). Its motion was made without advance notice to the opposing party.
Court’s analysis
Rule 26(d) generally bars discovery before the Rule 26(f) conference unless a court authorizes it. The court applied a flexible test requiring reasonableness and good cause, with particularly careful scrutiny because the request was both early and made without notice. The court concluded that Strike 3 satisfied that standard.
The court noted that Strike 3’s arguments were tailored to a test used when deciding whether to quash a subpoena to protect a person’s anonymity. That issue was not before the court, and the order did not decide the merits of any future motion to quash.
Ruling and conditions
The court granted Strike 3’s motion for permission to serve a third-party subpoena before the Rule 26(f) conference. Strike 3 may serve Verizon Fios with a Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 45 subpoena seeking the name and address of the subscriber associated with IP address 74.101.204.247, and must attach the order to the subpoena.
Verizon Fios must make a reasonable attempt to identify the subscriber within seven days after service and provide the subscriber with the subpoena and order. Verizon Fios has 21 days after service to move to quash or otherwise object. The identified subscriber has 14 days after receiving the subpoena from Verizon Fios to do the same. If there is no motion to quash or other objection, Verizon Fios must provide the requested information within 21 days after notifying the subscriber.
Strike 3 may use the disclosed information only to protect and enforce the rights described in its complaint. The information may not be disclosed to anyone other than Strike 3 and its counsel without further court permission. Judge Gregory H. Woods directed the clerk to terminate the motion at Docket No. 9.
Read the full 3-page opinion on CourtListener, the free public archive maintained by the Free Law Project.