Opinion
23-CV-10527 (AS)
01-03-2024
ORDER
ARUN SUBRAMANIAN, UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE
Plaintiff has filed a motion to pursue a Rule 45 subpoena in advance of the Rule 26(f) conference in this case, seeking only identifying information of the defendant from Verizon Fios (defendant's ISP) and only for purposes of properly serving the defendant with the complaint. Plaintiff's motion is granted based on the authorities cited in support of the motion, Dkt. 9, which establish good cause for pursuing this subpoena. However, this is without prejudice to Verizon raising any objections that it may have to the subpoena. Further, Strike 3 should advise Verizon that in advance of responding to the subpoena with the information requested, Verizon should send the defendant a notice and copy of the subpoena. See Fed.R.Civ.P. 45(a) (4). Strike 3 is further advised to follow the Court's Individual Practices, including its lettermotion requirement for discovery motions, in the future. The Clerk is directed to terminate Dkt. 8.
SO ORDERED.