Court, Explained
U.S. Federal District Courts
←Back to docket
S.D.N.Y.Procedural orderFiled May 20, 2024

Strike 3 Holdings, LLC v. Doe

Judge
Lewis Liman
Docket
1:24-cv-02328
Court
U.S. District Court · Southern District of New York
Pages
4
DiscoveryCivil ProcedureIntellectual Property
In one sentence

In Strike 3 Holdings v. John Doe, Judge Liman granted permission to subpoena Verizon Fios for information identifying the unnamed defendant.

Who this affects

Strike 3 Holdings may seek John Doe’s true name and current and permanent address from Verizon Fios. John Doe may challenge or seek confidential treatment of the subpoena within the stated deadlines, and Verizon Fios must follow the notice and disclosure procedures ordered by the court.

What happened

Strike 3 Holdings, LLC v. John Doe involves Strike 3’s claim that a person using internet address 108.27.222.17 illegally distributed its copyrighted content. Strike 3 did not know the person’s name and asked to obtain identifying information from Verizon Fios, the internet provider identified in its motion.

The court allowed Strike 3 to serve Verizon Fios with a subpoena before the parties’ required early case conference. The subpoena may seek only John Doe’s true name and current and permanent address. Verizon Fios must notify John Doe, who will have 60 days to challenge the subpoena or ask to proceed anonymously.

Judge Lewis J. Liman granted Strike 3’s motion and ordered protective procedures for the subpoena. If no one challenges it within 60 days, Verizon Fios will have 10 days to provide the requested information, which Strike 3 may use only to protect its rights described in the complaint.

The detailed version

For law students, journalists, and other readers who want the full reasoning

Case
Strike 3 Holdings, LLC v. Doe · No. 1:24-cv-02328
Judge
Lewis Liman
Date
May 20, 2024

Background

Strike 3 Holdings, LLC alleged that John Doe, a subscriber associated with Internet Protocol address 108.27.222.17, illegally distributed its copyrighted content. Because Strike 3 did not know John Doe’s identity, it moved under Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 26(d)(1) for permission to serve a subpoena on Verizon Fios, the internet service provider identified in Strike 3’s motion, before the parties held the conference normally required at the beginning of discovery.

Ruling

The court granted the motion. It authorized Strike 3 to serve Verizon Fios with a subpoena under Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 45 seeking only John Doe’s true name and current and permanent address. The subpoena may not request additional information, including an email address or telephone number. The court stated that it would issue a protective order in connection with the subpoena.

Notice and deadlines

Verizon Fios must serve John Doe with the subpoena, the order, and the attached notice within 60 days after the subpoena is served on Verizon Fios. John Doe then has 60 days from service of the subpoena to file a motion challenging it, including a motion to cancel or change the subpoena, or to ask to litigate anonymously. If John Doe files such a motion, he must also notify Verizon Fios, which must not release his contact information to Strike 3 while the motion is pending.

If neither John Doe nor Verizon Fios challenges the subpoena within the 60-day period, Verizon Fios will have 10 days to provide the requested information to Strike 3. Any information disclosed may be used only to protect Strike 3’s rights described in its complaint. The order also states that John Doe may proceed anonymously while the court considers whether there is a basis to withhold his identity from the public.

The authoritative version

Read the full 4-page opinion on CourtListener, the free public archive maintained by the Free Law Project.

Open opinion PDF →
Summary written with AI assistance. See how summaries are made. Spot something wrong? Tell us.