Strike 3 Holdings Minnesota Lawsuit Trends: May–October 2026
Are Strike 3 Holdings Minnesota lawsuits increasing?
Yes. Based on the dockets reviewed as of November 4, 2026, Strike 3 Holdings, LLC filed 44 federal lawsuits in Minnesota between May 3 and November 2, 2026, up 25.7% from 35 in the prior six months.
- Every case was filed in the U.S. District Court for the District of Minnesota.
- Filings were uneven: 20 cases on May 19–20 and 11 on September 25, with smaller batches in June, July and August. No new Minnesota cases appeared in October or on November 1–2, and then 4 new cases were filed on November 3, 2026, after the six-month window.
- Comcast is the provider in 36 of the 44 cases.
If your internet provider sent you a letter about a Strike 3 Holdings case in Minnesota, this report shows how often these cases are being filed, how the Minnesota federal court is handling them, which providers appear, and what usually comes next. Call or tap (312) 201-8310 for a free, confidential consultation with Torrent Defenders®, a practice of Antonelli Law®, or request a consultation online.
How many Strike 3 Holdings Minnesota lawsuits were filed from May to October 2026?
Strike 3 Holdings filed 44 Minnesota federal lawsuits from May 3 to November 2, 2026, based on the dockets reviewed as of November 4, 2026. That compares with 35 cases in the prior six months (November 2025 to May 2, 2026), an increase of 25.7%.
The batches were 10 cases on May 19 and 10 on May 20, 3 on June 19, 5 on July 22, 5 on August 19–20 and 11 on September 25. The dockets we reviewed showed no new Minnesota cases in October or on November 1–2. On November 3, 2026, just after the six-month window, Strike 3 Holdings filed 4 more Minnesota cases, 0:26-cv-04700 through 0:26-cv-04703. Those 4 cases are not counted in the 44.
| Court | Prior six months | May 3 – Nov. 2, 2026 | Change |
|---|---|---|---|
| District of Minnesota | 35 | 44 | +25.7% |
Source: federal court dockets reviewed as of November 4, 2026. Counts are cases with Strike 3 Holdings, LLC as plaintiff against a Doe subscriber, by filing date. Every caption was checked, and all 79 cases in both periods are Strike 3 Holdings v. Doe copyright cases.
How did the monthly filings break down?
| Month | Filing date | Cases |
|---|---|---|
| May 3–31, 2026 | May 19–20 | 20 |
| June 2026 | June 19 | 3 |
| July 2026 | July 22 | 5 |
| August 2026 | August 19–20 | 5 |
| September 2026 | September 25 | 11 |
| October 2026 | — | 0 |
| November 1–2, 2026 | — | 0 |
| November 3, 2026 (after the six-month window) | November 3 | 4 |
Source: federal court dockets reviewed as of November 4, 2026.
For comparison, the prior six months ran Nov. 21–30, 2025: 7, December 2025: 12, January 2026: 3, February 2026: 4, March 2026: 8, April 2026: 1. The May batch alone (20 cases) was larger than any month in the prior period.
For the September batch in national context, see our post on Strike 3 Holdings September 2026 filings.
How is the Minnesota federal court handling Strike 3 Holdings cases?
The District of Minnesota has handled these cases in groups, through joint orders entered in many cases at once:
- One judge pairing. The Minnesota cases we reviewed were assigned to Chief Judge Patrick J. Schiltz, with Magistrate Judge Dulce J. Foster handling the early discovery motions.
- One order for 40 cases. On August 14, 2026, Magistrate Judge Foster granted Strike 3 Holdings’ motions for leave to serve an ISP subpoena before the Rule 26(f) conference in 40 separate cases filed from February to July 2026, under Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 26(d)(1) and Rule 45. That included the May, June and July 2026 cases. The cases were not merged.
- Privacy limits. The order gives the ISP at least 60 days before any production, gives the ISP 14 days to notify the subscriber, and gives the subscriber 45 days after that notice. It also required a status report in each case by October 13, 2026 that does not include the defendant’s identity. Our post on the August 14 Minnesota order explains each step.
- More time to serve. The court has repeatedly extended Strike 3 Holdings’ deadline to serve the defendant. On August 19, 2026, it extended the deadline in the May cases to December 18, 2026, and it entered similar extensions in the June cases on September 17 and the July cases on October 21.
Our docket searches for May 3 to November 2, 2026 found no amended complaints, dismissals, orders to show cause, severance orders, sanctions orders, default judgments or motions to quash in Minnesota Strike 3 Holdings cases, so there is no amended complaint to post.
Which internet providers appear in the Minnesota cases?
Every Minnesota caption reads “Strike 3 Holdings, LLC v. Doe subscriber assigned IP address …”. We matched the IP address in each in-period caption to the network that the address is registered to.
| Provider | Cases |
|---|---|
| Comcast (Xfinity) | 36 |
| US Internet | 5 |
| Verizon | 3 |
Source: case captions in federal court dockets reviewed as of November 4, 2026, matched to American Registry for Internet Numbers records.
Comcast Xfinity accounts for 36 of the 44 cases, and US Internet, a Minneapolis-area fiber provider, for 5. Your own letter is the best source: the provider that sent it is the one that received the subpoena. See our guides to a Comcast Xfinity letter and a Verizon letter, our ISP letter guide, and the Antonelli Law ISP subpoena defense page.
The 4 cases filed on November 3, 2026, which are outside the 44-case count above, list CenturyLink in 2 cases (0:26-cv-04701 and 0:26-cv-04702, Saint Paul), US Internet in 1 (0:26-cv-04700, Minneapolis) and Comcast Cable in 1 (0:26-cv-04703, Saint Paul).
What Minnesota Strike 3 Holdings news came out from May to November 2026?
- November 3, 2026: four new Minnesota cases were filed.
- October 21, 2026: the court extended the service deadline in the July cases.
- October 13, 2026: status reports were due in the 40 cases covered by the August 14 order.
- September 25, 2026: Strike 3 Holdings filed 11 Minnesota cases, the largest batch since May.
- September 9, 2026: we covered the August 14 order in our post on ISP subpoenas in 40 Minnesota cases.
- August 14, 2026: the court granted early ISP subpoenas in 40 Minnesota cases in a single order.
- June 15, 2026: nationally, 404 Media reported that a federal judge in California let Strike 3 Holdings’ case against Meta Platforms go forward. That case does not change the process for Minnesota subscribers.
What does this mean if you received an ISP letter in Minnesota?
A letter from your internet provider means the court has allowed Strike 3 Holdings to ask for the name and address on your account. It does not mean you have been found responsible for anything.
- Note the deadline. Your letter gives the date the provider plans to release your information. In Minnesota the subpoena order has come several months after filing, so letters for the September cases may still be ahead.
- Do not contact Strike 3 Holdings yourself. Anything you say can be used in the case.
- Do not ignore it. Our 2026 subpoena guide and guide on ignoring a subpoena walk through each step. Antonelli Law also explains motions to quash in BitTorrent cases and what happens if your ISP released your name.
Many people we talk with want a quiet, anonymous resolution. See how an anonymous resolution works, what an amended complaint means and whether your name can become public.
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.
Clients we have represented in Minnesota
Antonelli Law® has represented clients across Minnesota in Strike 3 Holdings cases.
Our Minnesota clients have lived in Alexandria, Bloomington, Brooklyn Park, Burnsville, Circle Pines, Coon Rapids, Cottage Grove, Crystal, Dundas, Eden Prairie, Elk River, Fridley, Hugo, Inver Grove Heights, Lake Elmo, Little Canada, Maplewood, Minneapolis, Minnetonka, New Brighton, New Hope, North St. Paul, Plymouth, Ramsey, Rochester, Roseville, Shoreview, St. Paul, Woodbury, and Zimmerman.
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 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.
Clients Appreciate Our Communication & Results
Here is just one client review of Alec Dardis. Click the link below for many others.
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 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 very 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 a Strike 3 Holdings Minnesota case?
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 consultation about your letter and the documents in your case.
Call or tap: (312) 201-8310
Or 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. A consultation is not a decision to go to court.
Alec Dardis
Paul Sanders
Melissa Ross
Jeffrey Antonelli
Frequently asked questions about Strike 3 Holdings Minnesota lawsuits
Do I need a Minnesota lawyer for a Strike 3 Holdings case?
No. Strike 3 Holdings Minnesota lawsuits are federal copyright cases. Antonelli Law® handles Strike 3 Holdings matters in federal courts nationwide, including the District of Minnesota, and you can work with us by phone, email, and secure upload without visiting an office.
How many Strike 3 Holdings lawsuits were filed in Minnesota from May to October 2026?
Based on the dockets reviewed as of November 4, 2026, Strike 3 Holdings filed 44 Minnesota federal lawsuits from May 3 through November 2, 2026, compared with 35 in the prior six months, a 25.7% increase.
Which court handles Strike 3 Holdings cases in Minnesota?
The U.S. District Court for the District of Minnesota. The Minnesota cases we reviewed were assigned to Chief Judge Patrick J. Schiltz, with Magistrate Judge Dulce J. Foster handling the early discovery motions.
Which internet providers are named in the Minnesota cases?
Every Minnesota caption lists the subscriber’s IP address. Of the 44 cases filed from May 3 to November 2, 2026, 36 trace to Comcast, 5 to US Internet and 3 to Verizon.
How long does the ISP give me before releasing my name in Minnesota?
Under the August 14, 2026 order covering 40 Minnesota cases, the subpoena must give the ISP at least 60 days before any production. The ISP then has 14 days to notify the subscriber, and the subscriber has 45 days after that notice to act.
What if I did not download anything?
The person who pays for the internet account is not always the person who used it. Shared Wi-Fi, roommates, guests and family members are common in these cases. 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 Minnesota: court allows ISP subpoenas in 40 cases
- Strike 3 Holdings September 2026 filings
- The mid-August 2026 filing wave
- Got a Comcast Xfinity letter about Strike 3 Holdings?
- Got a Verizon letter about Strike 3 Holdings?
- Strike 3 Holdings in Minnesota
- Strike 3 Holdings Wisconsin filings
- Strike 3 Holdings ISP notices
- Strike 3 Holdings ISP letter guide
- Strike 3 Holdings subpoena guide for 2026
- Should I ignore a Strike 3 Holdings subpoena?
- How an anonymous resolution works
- Will my name become public?
- Strike 3 Holdings FAQ
Court website: District of Minnesota. Statute: 17 U.S.C. § 504.
Data note: counts and rulings in this report are based on the federal dockets reviewed as of November 4, 2026. Docket descriptions vary by court, and docket entries were available for only some Minnesota cases, so some rulings may be described differently than shown here. Published November 3, 2026.
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®.
MALIBU MEDIA LLC Files 7 New Lawsuits in MICHIGAN – ISP Subpoena Defense
ME2 Productions Inc Sues Colorado Internet Users – Free Consultation With Antonelli Law Defense
How To Resolve Your Strike 3 Holdings Lawsuit in Los Angeles
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.