Strike 3 Holdings, LLC v. Doe
- Lorna Schofield
- 1:24-cv-02502
- U.S. District Court · Southern District of New York
- 6
In Strike 3 Holdings v. John Doe, Judge Schofield allowed limited Internet-provider discovery while keeping Doe anonymous.
Strike 3 Holdings, LLC may seek John Doe’s name and permanent address from Spectrum, but may not seek Doe’s email address or telephone number through this subpoena. John Doe may remain anonymous and may challenge the subpoena within the specified period. Spectrum must provide notice, preserve the information, and withhold disclosure while a timely challenge is pending or until the court orders otherwise.
What happened
Strike 3 Holdings, LLC sued John Doe and asked to learn Doe’s identity from Doe’s Internet Service Provider, Spectrum.
The court allowed Strike 3 to seek Doe’s name and permanent address, but not an email address or telephone number. The order also addressed privacy protections and procedures for challenging the subpoena.
Judge Schofield allowed the subpoena, permitted Doe to remain anonymous unless the court orders otherwise, and restricted how any disclosed information may be used.
The detailed version
- Strike 3 Holdings, LLC v. Doe · No. 1:24-cv-02502
- Lorna Schofield
- Apr. 15, 2024
Background
Strike 3 Holdings, LLC asked for permission under Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 26(d)(1) to serve a subpoena on John Doe’s Internet Service Provider, Spectrum, before the parties’ required planning conference. The subpoena sought information that could identify Doe so Strike 3 could serve the lawsuit. The notice to Doe states that Strike 3 claims Doe illegally downloaded and/or distributed copyrighted material and that Strike 3 knows the Internet Protocol address associated with the alleged activity.
Court’s analysis
The court applied a flexible reasonableness-and-good-cause standard for expedited discovery. It found that Strike 3 had satisfied the requirements for early discovery. The court emphasized that the requested information was limited to Doe’s true name and permanent address and that Strike 3 appeared unable to identify or serve Doe without it.
The court also recognized privacy concerns because of the nature of the copyrighted material and the possibility that the Internet provider could falsely identify Doe. Strike 3 did not oppose allowing Doe to remain anonymous and to enter a confidentiality agreement while the case proceeds.
Ruling and procedures
The court granted Strike 3’s motion for leave to serve a subpoena under Rule 45 on Spectrum for Doe’s name and address. Strike 3 may not subpoena Doe’s email address or telephone number. Doe may proceed anonymously unless and until the court orders otherwise.
Spectrum must provide Doe with the subpoena, the order, and the attached notice within 60 days after being served. Doe then has 60 days after receiving those materials to file a motion challenging the subpoena, including a motion to cancel or change it. Spectrum may not disclose Doe’s identifying information before that deadline, or while a timely challenge is pending unless the court orders it to resume disclosure. Any information disclosed may be used only to protect Strike 3’s rights described in its complaint.
The court also ordered that Strike 3 may not begin settlement discussions before serving the complaint without the court’s permission, although Strike 3 may participate if Doe starts those discussions. The court required Spectrum to preserve subpoenaed information, addressed possible production charges, directed Strike 3 to file a status letter by May 30, 2024, and adjourned the initial pretrial conference to July 17, 2024. Judge Lorna G. Schofield directed the Clerk of Court to close Docket Number 9.
Read the full 6-page opinion on CourtListener, the free public archive maintained by the Free Law Project.