Strike 3 Holdings, LLC v. JOHN DOE subscriber assigned IP Address 68.62.69.59

Filing 5

ORDER granting #4 Motion for Leave to Serve Third Party Subpoena Prior to Rule 26(f) Conference. Signed by District Judge Terrence G. Berg. (AChu)

Case 2:21-cv-12978-TGB-JJCG ECF No. 5, PageID.68 Filed 01/07/22 Page 1 of 3

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
EASTERN DISTRICT OF MICHIGAN
SOUTHERN DIVISION
STRIKE 3 HOLDINGS, LLC,

2:21-CV-12978-TGB

Plaintiff,
vs.
JOHN
DOE
SUBSCRIBER
ASSIGNED
IP
ADDRESS
68.62.69.59,

HONORABLE TERRENCE G.
BERG

Defendant.

ORDER GRANTING PLAINTIFF’S MOTION
FOR LEAVE TO SERVE THIRD PARTY SUBPOENA
PRIOR TO RULE 26(f) CONFERENCE
This matter is before the Court on plaintiff Malibu Media’s motion
for leave to serve a subpoena on internet service provider Comcast
Cable (“ISP”), seeking the name and contact information of the John
Doe defendant identified in the complaint. The Court finds Plaintiff has
established that good cause exists for its request to serve a subpoena
prior to a Rule 26(f) conference.

Case 2:21-cv-12978-TGB-JJCG ECF No. 5, PageID.69 Filed 01/07/22 Page 2 of 3

Accordingly, the Plaintiff’s motion for leave to serve a subpoena on
the ISP (Dkt. 4) is GRANTED to the following extent:
1.

Plaintiff may serve the ISP with a Rule 45 subpoena

commanding the ISP to provide Plaintiff with only the true name and
address of the John Doe defendant to whom the ISP assigned IP
address 68.62.69.59. Plaintiff shall attach to any such subpoena a copy
of this Order.
2.

Plaintiff may also serve a Rule 45 subpoena in the same

manner as above on any service provider that is identified in response
to a subpoena as a provider of Internet services to the Defendant.
3.

Within seven days of service of the subpoena, the ISP shall

reasonably attempt to identify John Doe and provide him or her with a
copy of the subpoena and this Order. If the ISP is unable to determine,
to a reasonable degree of technical certainty, the identity of the user of
the particular IP address, it shall so notify the Court and Plaintiff's
counsel.
4.

The subpoenaed ISP shall not require Plaintiff to pay a fee

in advance of providing the subpoenaed information, nor shall the
subpoenaed ISP require Plaintiff to pay a fee for an IP address that is

Case 2:21-cv-12978-TGB-JJCG ECF No. 5, PageID.70 Filed 01/07/22 Page 3 of 3

not controlled by the ISP.

If necessary, the Court will resolve any

disputes between the ISP and Plaintiff regarding the reasonableness of
the amount proposed to be charged by the ISP after the subpoenaed
information is provided to Plaintiff.
5.

Plaintiff may only use the information disclosed in response

to a Rule 45 subpoena served on the ISP for the purpose of protecting
and enforcing Plaintiff’s rights as set forth in its Complaint.
SO ORDERED.
DATED this 7th day of January, 2022.
BY THE COURT:
/s/Terrence G. Berg
TERRENCE G. BERG
United States District Judge