Strike 3 Holdings, LLC v. Doe
- Andrew Carter
- 1:24-cv-00642
- U.S. District Court · Southern District of New York
- 2
In Strike 3 Holdings v. John Doe, Judge Carter allowed subpoenas seeking the defendant’s identity before the required conference.
Strike 3 Holdings, LLC, John Doe, Verizon Fios, and any other internet-service provider identified in response to a subpoena.
What happened
Strike 3 Holdings, LLC sued John Doe, identified by an internet address, and asked to serve Verizon Fios with a subpoena before the parties’ required early case conference.
The court found good cause and allowed Strike 3 Holdings to subpoena Verizon Fios for the defendant’s true name and address. The plaintiff may also subpoena another internet provider identified in response to a subpoena.
The order requires certain providers to notify the defendant if federal cable-privacy law applies and limits use of the information to protecting and enforcing the rights asserted in the complaint. Judge Andrew Carter issued the order on May 9, 2024.
The detailed version
- Strike 3 Holdings, LLC v. Doe · No. 1:24-cv-00642
- Andrew Carter
- May 9, 2024
Background
Strike 3 Holdings, LLC asked for permission to serve a third-party subpoena on Verizon Fios before the parties held the conference normally required by Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 26(f). The defendant is identified in the caption as John Doe, a subscriber assigned the internet protocol address 173.52.75.21.
Court’s ruling
The court found that Strike 3 Holdings had established good cause to serve the subpoena. It authorized the plaintiff to serve Verizon Fios with a Rule 45 subpoena seeking the defendant’s true name and address. A copy of the order must be attached to the subpoena.
The order also allows Strike 3 Holdings to serve the same type of subpoena on any other internet-service provider identified in response to a subpoena as providing internet services to one of the defendants.
If Verizon Fios qualifies as a cable operator under federal law, it must comply with the federal cable-privacy provision concerning disclosure of personal identifying information. That provision permits disclosure under a court order when the subscriber is notified of the order by the person receiving it. The order therefore requires the provider to send a copy of the order to the defendant.
Strike 3 Holdings may use information disclosed in response to the subpoena only to protect and enforce the rights asserted in its complaint. Judge Andrew Carter issued the order on May 9, 2024.
Read the full 2-page opinion on CourtListener, the free public archive maintained by the Free Law Project.