govinfo:USCOURTS-ohsd-3_26-cv-00122-0

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 
SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF OHIO 
WESTERN DIVISION 
 
STRIKE 3 HOLDINGS, LLC, 
 
Plaintiff, 
 
vs. 
 
JOHN DOE subscriber assigned IP 
Address 74.136.160.225, 
 
Defendant. 
: 
: 
: 
: 
: 
: 
: 
: 
: 
: 

 
Judge Timothy S. Black 
 
ORDER: 
(1) GRANTING PLAINTIFF’S MOTION FOR LEAVE TO SERVE THIRD-
PARTY SUBPOENA PRIOR TO RULE 26(f) CONFERENCE; AND 
(2) ISSUING A PROTECTIVE ORDER 
 
This civil case is before the Court on Plaintiff’s motion for leave to serve a third-
party subpoena prior to the Rule 26(f) conference. (Doc. 6). 
Generally, a party “may not seek discovery from any source before the parties 
have conferred as required by Rule 26(f),” but the Federal Rules allow early discovery 
“when authorized . . . by court order.” Fed. R. Civ. P. 26(d)(1). Courts within the Sixth 
Circuit require a showing of good cause in order to authorize expedited discovery. 
Malibu Media, LLC v. Doe, No. 2:15-CV-1202, 2015 WL 12732859, at *1 (S.D. Ohio 
Apr. 13, 2015) (citation omitted). Good cause may be found based upon “(1) allegations 
of copyright infringement, (2) the danger that the ISP will not preserve the information 
sought, (3) the narrow scope of the information sought, and (4) the conclusion that 
expedited discovery would substantially contribute to moving the case forward.” Id. at 
*1 (citations omitted). 
Case: 3:26-cv-00122-TSB Doc #: 7 Filed: 06/08/26 Page: 1 of 3 PAGEID #: <pageID>
2 
Having reviewed the complaint, the instant motion, and the accompanying 
memorandum of points and authorities, the Court finds that Plaintiff has demonstrated 
good cause for early discovery. Plaintiff has alleged a claim for direct copyright 
infringement and has narrowly tailored the discovery it seeks to identifying the alleged 
infringer. Moreover, the information sought is necessary to prosecute Plaintiff’s claim 
and is otherwise unavailable. 
Accordingly, Plaintiff’s motion for leave to serve a third-party subpoena prior to 
the Rule 26(f) conference is GRANTED, subject to the following: 
1. Plaintiff may serve a Rule 45 subpoena on the Internet Service Provider 
(“ISP”) associated with the identified IP address, to obtain information to identify 
Defendant’s full name and residential address. Plaintiff is not permitted to seek or obtain 
Defendant’s email address(es) or telephone number(s). Plaintiff may use the information 
disclosed in response to a Rule 45 subpoena served on the ISP only for the limited 
purpose of protecting and enforcing its rights as alleged in the Complaint. 
2. The return date for the subpoena shall be no earlier than sixty (60) days 
from the date of service, and the ISP shall not produce any responsive information to 
Plaintiff before the return date of the subpoena. Plaintiff shall attach a copy of this Order 
to the subpoena. 
3. Within fourteen (14) days of receipt of the subpoena, the ISP shall 
reasonably attempt to identify the subject John Doe subscriber and give said subscriber 
written notice of the subpoena, which may include e-mail notice. The ISP’s notice to 
John Doe subscriber shall include a copy of the subpoena and this Order. 
--
Case: 3:26-cv-00122-TSB Doc #: 7 Filed: 06/08/26 Page: 2 of 3 PAGEID #: <pageID>
3 
4. Any party seeking to move to quash the subpoena should do so no later
than twenty-eight (28) days after the date on which the ISP gives written notice to John 
Doe subscriber. In the event a motion to quash is filed, Plaintiff’s counsel shall 
immediately serve a copy of the motion to the ISP. Plaintiff’s counsel shall further 
instruct the ISP that, pursuant to this Order, the ISP shall preserve any subpoenaed 
information, pending the resolution of the motion to quash. 
5. Further, considering the sensitive and personal nature of Plaintiff’s
allegations, the risk of false positives when identifying ISP subscribers, and the public’s 
common law right of access to court proceedings, the Court finds that permitting 
Defendant to proceed anonymously for a limited time is reasonable. See e.g., Strike 3 
Holdings, LLC v. Doe, No. 19-10720, 2019 WL 2523591, at *1 (E.D. Mich. June 19, 
2019). Accordingly, pursuant to Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 26(c), the Court issues 
a protective order. Defendant may proceed anonymously until discovery suggests that 
they are the individual connected to the IP address in Strike 3’s non-party subpoena.
1 
Parties may move to modify this protective order at any time. 
IT IS SO ORDERED. 
Date: 
Timothy S. Black 
United States District Judge 
1 To ensure anonymity consistent with this Order, Defendant shall be identified on the public 
docket and in any public filings as “John Doe,” with no further identifying or contact 
information. However, if Defendant submits any documents for filing pro se, such documents 
shall be submitted to the Clerk’s Office containing Defendant’s full name and contact 
information. The Court will file a redacted copy on the public docket and further file an 
unredacted copy UNDER SEAL. 
6/8/2026 s/Timothy S. Black
Case: 3:26-cv-00122-TSB Doc #: 7 Filed: 06/08/26 Page: 3 of 3 PAGEID #: <pageID>

Passage view · GavelSight