Strike 3 Holdings, LLC v. Doe

Filing 6

ORDER granting 4 Motion for leave to serve Third Party subpoena. Signed by District Judge John Corbett O'Meara. (WBar)

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
EASTERN DISTRICT MICHIGAN
SOUTHERN DIVISION
STRIKE 3 HOLDINGS, LLC,
Plaintiff,
v.
JOHN DOE subscriber assigned IP
Address 75.39.36.69,
Defendant.

)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)

Civil Case No. 5:18-cv-10094-JCO-DRG

ORDER GRANTING MOTION FOR LEAVE TO SERVE
THIRD PARTY SUBPOENA PRIOR TO A RULE 26(f) CONFERENCE
THIS CAUSE came before the Court upon Plaintiff’s Motion for Leave to
Serve a Third Party Subpoena Prior to a Rule 26(f) Conference (the “Motion”), and
the Court being duly advised in the premises does hereby:
FIND, ORDER AND ADJUDGE:
1.

Plaintiff established that “good cause” exists for it to serve a third party

subpoena on AT&T U-verse (hereinafter the “ISP”). See UMG Recording, Inc. v.
Doe, 2008 WL 4104214, *4 (N.D. Cal. 2008); and Arista Records LLC v. Does 119, 551 F. Supp. 2d 1, 6–7 (D.D.C. 2008).
2.

Plaintiff may serve the ISP with a Rule 45 subpoena commanding the

ISP to provide Plaintiff with the true name and address of the Defendant to whom

1

the ISP assigned an IP address as set forth in the Complaint. Plaintiff shall attach to
any such subpoena a copy of this Order.
3.

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 one of the Defendants.
4.

If the ISP qualifies as a “cable operator,” as defined by 47 U.S.C. §

522(5), which states:
the term “cable operator” means any person or group of persons
(A) who provides cable service over a cable system and directly or
through one or more affiliates owns a significant interest in such
cable system, or
(B) who otherwise controls or is responsible for, through any
arrangement, the management and operation of such a cable
system.
it shall comply with 47 U.S.C. § 551(c)(2)(B), which states:
A cable operator may disclose such [personal identifying] information
if the disclosure is . . . made pursuant to a court order authorizing such
disclosure, if the subscriber is notified of such order by the person to
whom the order is directed.
by sending a copy of this Order to the Defendant.
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

2

rights as set forth in its Complaint.

SO ORDERED.
Date: February 14, 2018

s/John Corbett O’Meara
United States District Judge

I hereby certify that on February 14, 2018 a copy of this order was served
upon counsel of record using the ECF system.

s/William Barkholz
Case Manager

3