Strike 3 Holdings Amended Complaints in New Jersey and New York
A Strike 3 Holdings amended complaint was filed in New Jersey on October 12, 2026, and another in New York on October 8, 2026. Both cases started against a “John Doe subscriber assigned IP address.” The New Jersey amended complaint now names an individual. The New York amended complaint still uses the John Doe caption and redacts the name.
What you Can Learn
Our short videos explain some of the important things to know about the Strike 3 Holdings lawsuit process, and your main options right now.
Many clients have told us our videos are very helpful. Click the image below to watch.
If one of these docket numbers matches the ISP letter you received, the details below may help you understand where your case stands. For background, see Strike 3 Amended Complaint: What the Later Stage Means.
New Strike 3 Holdings amended complaints in New Jersey and New York
| Filed | Docket | IP address | City | ISP | Works listed |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 10/12/2026 (amended) 07/17/2026 (original) |
2:26-cv-08887 (D.N.J.) Amended complaint · Exhibit A |
71.226.235.210 | Jersey City, NJ | Comcast Cable | 26 |
| 10/08/2026 (amended) 01/21/2026 (original) |
2:26-cv-00366 (E.D.N.Y.) Amended complaint · Exhibit A |
173.77.165.89 | Massapequa, NY | Verizon Fios | 30 |
The original complaints in both cases were not obtained by publication time, so this post does not compare the number of works between the original and amended filings.
2:26-cv-08887 (D.N.J.): what the amended complaint says
- Courthouse location: Newark.
- Defendant: the caption changed from a John Doe subscriber to a named individual. We are not repeating the name here.
- Subpoena: Strike 3 says it served the court-authorized subpoena on Comcast on July 30, 2026, and that Comcast identified the account holder.
- Hash dates in Exhibit A: August 19, 2024 to June 22, 2026.
- Allegations about the household: the complaint alleges the person lived alone, that a single BitTorrent client was observed, and that public social media matched other downloaded files. These are allegations. They are not findings.
2:26-cv-00366 (E.D.N.Y.): what the amended complaint says
- Courthouse location: Central Islip.
- Defendant: the caption still reads “John Doe subscriber assigned IP address 173.77.165.89.” The body adds an “a/k/a” with the name redacted, and the address is redacted too.
- Subpoena: Strike 3 says it served the subpoena on the ISP on or about March 4, 2026.
- Hash dates in Exhibit A: January 2, 2025 to January 13, 2026.
- Allegations about the household: the complaint says the home is a single-family home and names the other occupants only by relationship. The lists of other files are redacted.
Who is handling these cases – The Judges
The judge initials on each amended complaint show the assignments. In the New Jersey case, 2:26-cv-08887-JKS-JSA, the case is before District Judge Jamel K. Semper with Magistrate Judge Jessica S. Allen in the Newark courthouse. In the New York case, 2:26-cv-00366-SJB-SIL, it is before District Judge Sanket J. Bulsara with Magistrate Judge Steven I. Locke in the Central Islip courthouse.
Trends compared with earlier amended complaints
Our earlier amended-complaint post covered cases in Massachusetts, D.C., Michigan and Virginia. These are the first New York and New Jersey examples in this series.
- Timing: New Jersey went from filing to amendment in 87 days, which is quicker than the Virginia example at 117 days. New York took 260 days. The gap can be very different from one case to the next.
- Named vs. Doe: New Jersey filed unredacted and names the defendant. New York kept the John Doe caption with redactions, like the D.D.C. and E.D. Virginia examples.
- Courthouse location: The two cases are in different federal courts. The New Jersey case is in the United States District Court for the District of New Jersey, at the Newark courthouse. The New York case is in the United States District Court for the Eastern District of New York, at the Central Islip courthouse.
- Identifying the person: Both complaints go beyond the ISP response. They add household details and public-records matches.
What this stage means
An amended complaint is not a judgment, and it is not a finding that anyone downloaded anything. It usually comes before a waiver of service request or formal service of a summons, and either one starts a response deadline. Most people we talk with want a quiet, confidential resolution. We also defend cases in court when that is the right path. Every case is different, and nobody can predict the outcome.
You can email or upload your ISP letter, the full docket number, and any amended complaint or waiver document through our contact page, and an attorney will review them.
Attorney Highlight: Jeffrey Antonelli
Jeffrey Antonelli founded Antonelli Law Ltd. in 2007 and leads the firm’s BitTorrent Copyright Defense Group as well as its Drone/UAS Practice Group. He has been a civil litigator for nearly 25 years, representing corporations and individuals as plaintiffs and defendants in state and federal court. Before forming the firm, he worked for several litigation boutiques in Chicago’s Loop as well as a full service firm, handling hotly contested issues in intellectual property, business, insurance, and consumer fraud.
Jeffrey is a member of the federal trial bar of the Northern District of Illinois and is admitted to numerous federal courts around the country. He earned his law degree and a certificate in health law from the DePaul College of Law, after graduating from Loyola University in Chicago in philosophy. He has been interviewed by the media many times, including Bloomberg BNA, NBC, The New York Times, Chicago Lawyer, Chicago Tribune, and the Chicago Daily Law Bulletin.
Phone: (312) 201-8310. Email: Jeffrey@Antonelli-Law.com.
Clients Appreciate Our Communication & Results
Here is just one client review of Jeffrey Antonelli. Click the link below for many others.
Posted by John | August 05, 2026 | Hired Attorney
great experience with Antonelli
“I hired Jeffrey Antonelli for a copyright infringement issue (Strike3) in Massachusetts. It was a very good decision. He has dealt with many such cases and immediately put me at ease. He ended up negotiating a settlement that was much less than what I told him was my limit. He understood my privacy concerns and ensured that my name stayed out of any communication with opposing counsel, court filings etc. The whole issue was wrapped up within 3 weeks. He charges a non-negligible fee, but it is 100% worth it if you want to settle quickly and quietly and move on.”
Posted by anonymous | September 30, 2026 | Hired Attorney
Highly Recommend Alec Van Dardis
“We had a consultation with Alec and he explained our options in detail. He made us feel comfortable and gave us time to ask a lot of questions. At the end of the consultation we made another appointment so we could decide which option to take. We felt that we were in good hands starting with consultation. Alec was thorough in explaining every step, what we needed to do and the timing. He was a great communicator, always followed up and very professional. We are very grateful for all Alec did to get this case closed. We would highly recommend Alec to others that need his expertise.”
Got an ISP letter about one of these New Jersey or New York cases?
Most people we talk with want a quiet, anonymous resolution. We also defend cases in court when that is the better path. The first step is simply a free, confidential review of your letter.
Email or upload your documents through our contact page, or choose an attorney and book a time below.
Schedule Your Free Confidential Strike 3 Holdings Consultation
Speak directly with our team. Choose the attorney you prefer.
Alec Dardis
Melissa Ross
Jeffrey Antonelli
Paul Sanders
This post is legal information, not legal advice for any one case. Prior results do not guarantee a similar outcome.
TORRENT DEFENDERS® is a federally registered trademark owned exclusively by the Law Offices of Jeffrey J. Antonelli, Ltd.
Related reading
- Strike 3 Holdings amended complaint: what the later stage means
- Strike 3 Holdings New York subpoenas to Verizon and Spectrum
- Strike 3 Holdings New Jersey filings, mid-September 2026
- Strike 3 Holdings ISP subpoena orders
Strike 3 Holdings California Filings: Sacramento and Santa Ana adds 18 Cases: How to Deal with this?
Legal Help for Illinois Residents Sued by Cook Productions for “Mr. Church” Movie Downloads
Legal Help for Nevada Residents Sued by ME2 Productions for Mechanic: Resurrection Movie Downloads
About Author
JAntonelli
Jeffrey Antonelli is a member of the federal trial bar of the Northern District of Illinois and is admitted to numerous federal courts around the country. He has been a civil litigator nearly 25 years in a broad range of actions representing corporations and individuals as plaintiffs and defendants in state and federal court. Jeffrey has been interviewed by the media many times, including Bloomberg BNA, NBC, The New York Times, Chicago Lawyer, Chicago Tribune, and the longstanding lawyer’s publication Chicago Daily Law Bulletin. Prior to forming Antonelli Law Ltd. in 2007 Jeffrey worked for several litigation boutiques in Chicago’s Loop as well as a full service firm. His litigation experience includes hotly contested issues in intellectual property, business, insurance, and consumer fraud. He is an adviser to the Illinois Board of Higher Education Advisory Council for Private Business and Vocational Schools (PBVS), and was a member of the Illinois State Bar Association Education Law Section Council from 2012-2013. Jeffrey is especially proud of his work representing hundreds of students defrauded by improperly accredited educational institutions, including as certified class counsel. Before attending law school, Jeffrey was interested first in business, and then in biomedical ethics. These interests led him to graduate from the nation’s largest philosophy department at Loyola University in Chicago, where some of his favorite (and most challenging) subjects were cognitive science and philosophy of science. During college he held positions at the University of Chicago’s Ben May Institute; as a medical assistant for a University of Chicago foot and ankle surgeon; and volunteered in the emergency room at the University of Chicago Hospitals. These experiences led to studying health law at the DePaul College of Law where Jeffrey earned his law degree and a certificate in health law. At that time DePaul’s Institute for Health Law was consistently ranked in the top 10 health law specialty programs nationwide. During law school Jeffrey immersed himself in studying the practical and public policy aspects of health care through internships at the American Medical Association in Chicago, and on Capitol Hill at the Governmental Relations Office of the Association of American Medical Colleges in Washington, DC. Jeffrey has concentrated in civil litigation throughout his legal career, and is a member of the federal trial bar of the Northern District of Illinois, the Central District of Illinois federal court, and all federal courts of Colorado, Wisconsin, Michigan, and Indiana. In addition, he is a member of the DuPage County Bar Association and the Illinois State Bar Association. Jeffrey prides himself on his strong personal ideals, passionate, ethical advocacy, and working hard to bring the best possible results for his clients. He also maintains a special interest in cases involving fraud. Whether due to good parenting, his family’s law enforcement employment, undergraduate studies in philosophy including ethics, or a fortuitous outcome of good breeding, one essence of Jeffrey’s character is a drive to root out the truth behind fraudulent practices.