Strike 3 Holdings California: 19 New Cases (Free Guide)

Did your internet provider send you a letter about a Strike 3 Holdings California case filed November 3, 2026? On November 3, 2026, Strike 3 Holdings filed 19 new John Doe copyright cases in the U.S. District Court for the Central District of California. Each case names one internet subscriber identified only by an IP address. Below you will find every case, the Exhibit A details, the assigned judges where court records show one, where each case stands as of November 4, 2026, and what usually comes next. If your internet provider sends you a letter about one of these cases, call or tap (312) 201-8310 for a free, confidential consultation.

Strike 3 Holdings California filings: 19 cases filed November 3, 2026

All 19 cases were filed the same day. The first digit of each docket number is the courthouse location: “2:” is Los Angeles (11 cases), “5:” is Riverside (3 cases), and “8:” is Santa Ana (5 cases).

The table lists details from the Exhibit A for 14 of the 19 cases, the document attached to the complaint that lists the IP address, the approximate location, the internet provider, and the works Strike 3 Holdings says were shared. Links in the Docket column open those documents. For the other cases the row says “Pending” until the court makes the Exhibit A available. In these cases the caption names only a John Doe, so the IP address comes from the Exhibit A.

Source: court records for each case, including the complaint and Exhibit A, as of November 4, 2026. The city and provider come from Exhibit A and reflect the IP address, not a named person. “Pending” means the court has not yet made that case’s Exhibit A available. For the cases filed the day before, see Strike 3 Holdings California: November 2 filings. For all California filings, judges and court orders in one place, see our Strike 3 Holdings California lawsuits hub and our Central District of California page. For how these letters work in general, see our ISP letter guide.

What the Exhibit A details show

• 19 cases in one day. All 19 Strike 3 Holdings California cases were filed in the Central District of California on November 3, 2026, across the Los Angeles, Riverside and Santa Ana courthouses.
• 603 works in total. The 14 Exhibit A documents we have list between 25 and 79 works each. The largest, 2:26-cv-12886, lists 79 works (04/25/2026 to 10/13/2026).
• 11 different communities. The IP addresses trace to Los Angeles, CA (4 cases), Pomona, CA, Granada Hills, CA, Castaic, CA, Claremont, CA, Montebello, CA, La Mirada, CA, Temecula, CA, Palm Springs, CA, Corona, CA, and Brea, CA.
• Three providers. Eight cases involve Spectrum; four cases involve AT&T Internet; two cases involve Frontier Communications.
• Very different time spans. In 2:26-cv-12895 the activity listed covers 1 days (10/22/2026 to 10/22/2026). In 2:26-cv-12891 it runs from 02/10/2024 to 10/19/2026.
• Recent activity. The latest date listed in any of the Exhibit A documents is 10/22/2026, 12 days before filing.
• Overlapping titles. 45 file hashes appear in more than one Strike 3 Holdings California Exhibit A, so the same titles show up across different cases.

These details matter because the account holder named in a later subpoena response is not always the person who used the connection. A shared home network, a roommate, a guest, or an open router can all sit behind one IP address.

Judges and early subpoena motions in the Strike 3 Holdings California cases

We checked court records for all 19 Strike 3 Holdings California cases on November 4, 2026. As of November 4, 2026, the assigned judge was not on the papers we have for these cases. We will add it once the docket shows it. The court lists its judges on its judges page.

What the pattern shows

As of November 4, 2026, none of the dockets has a motion asking to subpoena the internet provider yet, so no order and no order conditions exist so far.

That is normal this early in a case. The next step is usually a motion for leave to serve a subpoena on the provider before the discovery conference. Once a judge rules, the order sets the conditions the provider and Strike 3 Holdings must follow, such as limiting the request to a name and address and setting a notice period. Because each judge writes their own order, the conditions can differ from case to case. You can see how judges handled earlier Strike 3 Holdings requests in California on our Strike 3 Holdings California lawsuits hub.

What this means if you are the John Doe

• No letter has gone out yet in these cases. A provider letter normally follows a court order, and none of these Strike 3 Holdings California cases has one so far.
• The letter will name the case. When it arrives, it should list the court, the docket number, and the IP address. Compare them with the table above.
• The letter sets your timeline. The date in your provider’s letter is the date to plan around.
• Your name is not in the public case. At this stage each case lists only an IP address.

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.

What usually happens next in Strike 3 Holdings California cases

1. Strike 3 Holdings files a John Doe complaint identified only by an IP address. That step is done in all 19 cases.
2. It asks the court for permission to subpoena the internet provider before the usual discovery conference. As of November 4, 2026, we have not seen that request filed in any of these cases.
3. If the court agrees, the provider notifies the account holder. That is the letter most people receive.
4. After the notice period in the court order, the provider may release the account holder’s name and address unless something is filed.

Use the dates in your own letter. Timelines in Strike 3 Holdings California cases depend on the judge and on the terms of each order. In the Strike 3 Holdings California cases where we have the Exhibit A, the internet providers listed are Spectrum (8 cases), AT&T Internet (4 cases), and Frontier Communications (2 cases). Those providers would send the subpoena letter for those cases. Our ISP letter guide explains what the letter means.

Clients we have represented in California

Antonelli Law® has represented about 396 clients who live in California in federal copyright matters since 2015. We handle Strike 3 Holdings California matters by phone, email, and secure upload through our contact page, so you do not need to travel to Los Angeles, Riverside, or Santa Ana to talk with us.

Our California clients have lived in Alameda, Albany, Alhambra, Altadena, Anaheim, Aptos, Artesia, Azusa, Bakersfield, Banning, Belmont, Benicia, Berkeley, Beverly Hills, Big Bear City, Burbank, Burlingame, Camarillo, Campbell, Canyon Country, Capistrano Beach, Carlsbad, Carmichael, Carson, Castro Valley, Cerritos, Chico, Chino Hills, Chula Vista, Citrus Heights, Clayton, Concord, Corona, Corte Madera, Costa Mesa, Covina, Culver City, Cupertino, Daly City, Danville, Davis, Diamond Bar, Downey, Dublin, East Palo Alto, El Cajon, Elk Grove, Emeryville, Escondido, Eureka, Fallbrook, Folsom, Forestville, Foster City, Fountain Valley, Fremont, Fresno, Fullerton, Gardena, Glendale, Glendora, Goleta, Granada Hills, Grand Terrace, Greenbrae, Hawthorne, Hayward, Hercules, and Hillsborough.

We have also represented California clients in Huntington Beach, Inglewood, Irvine, La Canada Flintridge, La Palma, La Verne, Ladera Ranch, Laguna Niguel, Lake Forest, Lakeside, Lakewood, Lancaster, Lathrop, Lincoln, Livermore, Lomita, Long Beach, Los Altos, Los Angeles, Los Gatos, Manhattan Beach, Marina, Marina Del Rey, Menifee, Menlo Park, Mill Valley, Millbrae, Milpitas, Mission Viejo, Modesto, Monterey, Monterey Park, Morgan Hill, Mountain House, Mountain View, Murrieta, Napa, Nevada City, Newark, Newhall, Newport Beach, North Highlands, Northridge, Novato, Oakland, Oakley, Orange, Orangevale, Orinda, Oxnard, Pacific Grove, Pacific Palisades, Pacifica, Palo Alto, Pasadena, Pebble Beach, Petaluma, Pismo Beach, Placentia, and Playa Del Rey.

We have also represented California clients in Pleasant Hill, Pleasanton, Pomona, Rancho Cucamonga, Redlands, Redondo Beach, Redwood City, Reseda, Rialto, Richmond, Riverbank, Rocklin, Roseville, Sacramento, San Bernardino, San Bruno, San Carlos, San Clemente, San Diego, San Dimas, San Francisco, San Gabriel, San Jose, San Leandro, San Mateo, San Pedro, San Rafael, San Ramon, Santa Ana, Santa Barbara, Santa Clara, Santa Clarita, Santa Cruz, Santa Monica, Santa Ynez, Santee, Saratoga, Sausalito, Seal Beach, Sherman Oaks, Sierra Madre, Simi Valley, Soquel, South San Francisco, Studio City, Suisun, Sunnyvale, Temecula, Thousand Oaks, Torrance, Trabuco Canyon, Tracy, Turlock, Tustin, Ukiah, Union City, and Upland.

We have also represented California clients in Vacaville, Vallejo, Van Nuys, Venice, Ventura, Villa Park, Visalia, Vista, Walnut, Walnut Creek, Walnut Grove, West Covina, West Hills, West Sacramento, Whittier, Winnetka, Woodland Hills, and Yorba Linda.

Attorney Highlight: Alec Dardis

Alec Dardis is an Associate at Antonelli Law®. Born and raised in Southern California (Orange County area), he was a competitive junior tennis player and captain of the Men’s Division 1 tennis team at Colgate University, where he earned a Bachelor of Arts in Philosophy. He later received the Dean’s Scholarship to DePaul University College of Law, earned a CALI Award in Negotiations, made Dean’s List, and graduated with a Juris Doctor and a Certificate in Intellectual Property. He is licensed in Illinois and handles federal copyright matters nationwide.

In the firm’s BitTorrent practice, Alec has personally assisted hundreds of clients with cases involving copyright holders, including Strike 3 Holdings. He handles the consultation, the reading of the letter, settlement talks when that is what the client wants, and court defense when that is the better path.

Phone: (312) 201-8310. Email: adardis@antonelli-law.com.

Book with Alec · Alec’s bio

Clients Appreciate Our Communication & Results

Here is just one client review of Alec Dardis. Click the link below for many others.

Frequently asked questions

Do I need a California lawyer for a Strike 3 Holdings case?

No. Strike 3 Holdings California cases are federal copyright cases. Antonelli Law® handles Strike 3 Holdings matters in federal courts nationwide, and you can work with us by phone, email, and upload.

Which courthouse is my case in?

Look at the first digit of the docket number on your letter or court order. In the Central District of California, 2: is Los Angeles, 5: is Riverside, and 8: is Santa Ana.

Will my name be public?

At the subpoena stage the case usually lists only an IP address. Many people resolve these matters confidentially through counsel, often without their name appearing in the public record.

What if I did not download anything?

The person who pays for the internet account is not always the person who used it. That difference can matter a great deal, and it is worth discussing in a free, confidential consultation before you respond to anyone.

Related reading

• Strike 3 Holdings ISP letter guide
• Strike 3 Holdings ISP notices
• Strike 3 Holdings FAQ
• Strike 3 Holdings California lawsuits hub

This page is general information about Strike 3 Holdings and similar BitTorrent copyright cases. It is not legal advice, and reading it does not create an attorney-client relationship. Every case is different. Client reviews describe individual experiences. Past results do not guarantee a similar outcome. Antonelli Law® defends people and businesses against copyright claims and does not represent copyright holders. Attorney advertising. Information is current as of November 4, 2026.

TORRENT DEFENDERS® is a federally registered trademark owned exclusively by the Law Offices of Jeffrey J. Antonelli, Ltd. dba Antonelli Law®.