08/12/2026

New Strike 3 Holdings Lawsuits in the Northern District of California – Strong Privacy Protections from Multiple Judges

By Jeffrey Antonelli AT&T, BitTorrent, California, Comcast Cable, Strike 3 Holdings LLC 0 Comments

By Attorney Jeffrey Antonelli, Antonelli Law | August 2026

Strike 3 Holdings Northern District of California cases have been filed in a new wave of “John Doe” copyright infringement lawsuits. These cases were primarily filed on July 24 and July 27, 2026, and target individuals identified only by IP address for the alleged downloading and distribution of adult films via BitTorrent.

The cases are concentrated in the Bay Area, with locations including San Francisco, San Jose, Santa Clara, Dublin, Pleasanton, Millbrae, Novato, Sunnyvale, Mountain View, Saratoga, Los Gatos, and other nearby communities. The majority of the IP addresses are associated with Comcast Cable, with a smaller number linked to AT&T Internet.

Notable Pattern: Strong Privacy Protections from Multiple Judges

One of the most important features of this group of cases is the protective language that several Northern District judges and magistrate judges have included in their early discovery orders. In multiple matters, the Court has required that:

Any name or personal identifying information of the defendant must be filed under seal
Redacted versions of documents must be filed in the public record
Strike 3 may not publicly disclose the subscriber’s identity without further court order or the subscriber’s consent
Defendants are given a clear opportunity to move to proceed anonymously before their identity becomes public

One San Francisco Example of a Protective ISP Subpoena Order for Northern District of California: District Judge Jacqueline Scott Corley

In one case filed by Strike 3 Holdings in the Northern District of California, San Francisco, case number 3:26-cv-07726-JSC U.S. District Court Judge Jacqueline Scott Corley included the following language in her Order allowing a Strike 3 Holdings ISP Subpoena to issue:

“Each subscriber and the ISP shall have 30 days from the date of service upon him, her, or it to file any motions in this Court contesting the subpoena (including a motion to quash or modify the subpoena). If the 30-day period lapses without the subscriber contesting the subpoena, the ISP shall have 10 days to produce to Plaintiff the information responsive to the subpoena with respect to that subscriber. The ISP shall not produce information to Plaintiff in response to the subpoena before the expiration of the above 40-day period. … Any name or other personal identifying information of any current or proposed defendant shall be filed UNDER SEAL in all court filings.”

— U.S. District Judge Jacqueline Scott Corley

Judges and magistrate judges who have entered particularly protective language in this batch include (among others):

Magistrate Judge Sallie Kim
District Judge Jacqueline Scott Corley
Magistrate Judge Thomas S. Hixson
Magistrate Judge Ajay S. Krishnan
Magistrate Judge Virginia K. DeMarchi
Magistrate Judge Joseph C. Spero
Magistrate Judge Kandis A. Westmore
District Judge Eumi K. Lee
Magistrate Judge Alex G. Tse

This consistent emphasis on privacy is meaningful. While the existence of a lawsuit is public, these orders help limit the public association of a real name with the allegations until the defendant has had a chance to respond or seek anonymity.

Patterns Worth Highlighting

Heavy concentration of filings in the Bay Area
Dominant ISP is Comcast; secondary is AT&T
Multiple judges independently including strong under-seal / anonymity protections — this is a favorable trend for defendants in this district
Cases filed in two main clusters (July 24 and July 27)

What Should You Do If You Received an ISP Notice?

If you have received a letter from Comcast or AT&T about a subpoena in one of these Strike 3 Holdings Northern District of California cases, here is practical guidance:

Do not ignore the notice. Deadlines continue to run.
Do not contact Strike 3 or its attorneys directly.
Preserve the letter and any related documents.
Contact experienced counsel promptly. The protective orders in many of these cases create a window in which informed action can still protect privacy and expand available options.
Remember that an IP address identifies a connection, not necessarily a specific person. Shared networks, household members, and other facts are often relevant.

Over the years we have represented more than 180 clients who lived in the same cities and communities now being targeted in this new wave of Strike 3 Holdings lawsuits — including San Jose, San Francisco, Sunnyvale, Santa Clara, Mountain View, Dublin, Pleasanton, Los Gatos, Milpitas, and many other Bay Area locations. We are very proud to have represented over 800 California clients since 2007 with legal needs including federal copyright infringement claims, and drone law services including FAA petitions.

If you have received a subpoena notice related to a Strike 3 Holdings Northern District of California ISP Subpoena or a Summons, we are available to discuss your options.

Call us confidentially at (312) 201-8310 or book a free consultation online.

Jeffrey Antonelli

“I recently received a notice of Subpoena from my ISP alleging copyright infringement from Strike 3 Holdings. Jeff took the time to explain my options… He did not pressure me… The case settled in a few weeks for an amount a good bit lower even than the estimate Jeff had initially given me. I am so glad I chose this firm.”

→ View original review on Avvo

Book a Free Consultation with Jeffrey Antonelli

Alec Van Dardis

“I am deeply grateful to Mr. Alec Dardis for his legal services as my attorney concerning a Strike 3 Holdings LLC copyright case. Mr. Dardis communicated clearly and regularly with me throughout the process. He gave sound legal advice and gained my trust from the beginning. I highly recommend Mr. Dardis as an attorney in such cases.”

→ View original review on Avvo

Book a Free Consultation with Alec Van Dardis

Paul Sanders

“Attorney Sanders was great! He was professional, extremely knowledgeable, and was very forthcoming… He let me know what to expect and gave me potential realistic outcomes.”

→ View original review on Avvo

Book a Free Consultation with Paul Sanders

Melissa Ross

“Melissa from Antonelli Law came through for me. She was patient with me and made a tough confusing situation a lot less confusing and she helped me get the best resolution possible.”

→ View original review

Book a Free Consultation with Melissa Ross

What You Should Do If You Received an ISP Notice

If you have received a letter from Comcast or AT&T about a subpoena in one of these Strike 3 Holdings Northern District of California cases, here is some practical guidance:

Do not ignore the notice. Deadlines continue to run.
Do not contact Strike 3 or its attorneys directly.
Preserve the letter and any related documents.
Contact experienced counsel promptly. The protective orders in many of these cases create a window in which informed action can still protect privacy and expand available options.
Remember that an IP address identifies a connection, not necessarily a specific person. Shared networks, household members, and other facts are often relevant.

Over the years we have represented more than 180 clients who lived in the same cities and communities now being targeted in this new wave of Strike 3 Holdings lawsuits — including San Jose, San Francisco, Sunnyvale, Santa Clara, Mountain View, Dublin, Pleasanton, Los Gatos, Milpitas, and many other Bay Area locations. We are proud to have represented over 800 California clients since 2007 on matters including federal copyright infringement claims.

Our Approach

Antonelli Law has been defending individuals in BitTorrent copyright cases since 2010, including numerous matters in the Northern District of California. We focus on clear communication, protecting privacy to the greatest extent possible under the circumstances, and resolving cases efficiently and ethically. This professional approach has been successful in helping over 800 California clients since 2007 with legal needs including federal copyright infringement claims.

We do not use pressure tactics. Our goal is to give people accurate information and competent representation during a stressful situation.

If you have received a subpoena notice related to a Strike 3 Holdings Northern District of California ISP Subpoena or a Summons, we are available to discuss your options.

Call us confidentially at (312) 201-8310
or book a free consultation online.

Complete List of Cases (July 24–27, 2026)

Below is the full list of the new Strike 3 Holdings filings in the Northern District of California. Protective language is included only for the cases where the Court entered it.

1.
Case No.: 3:26-cv-07686-WHO
Parties: Strike 3 Holdings, LLC v. John Doe subscriber assigned IP address 67.174.214.165
Judge: William H. Orrick
ISP: Comcast Cable
Works Infringed: 25
Location: Alameda, CA

2.
Case No.: 3:26-cv-07687-SK
Parties: Strike 3 Holdings, LLC v. John Doe subscriber assigned IP address 67.174.229.77
Judge: Sallie Kim
ISP: Comcast Cable
Works Infringed: 24
Location: Hercules, CA

“IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that any name or other personal identifying information of any current or proposed defendant shall be filed UNDER SEAL in all filings according to the procedures set forth in Civil Local Rule 79-5. In addition to filing those documents under seal, Plaintiff shall also file redacted versions of both documents in the public record, redacting only defendant(s) name(s) and any other personal identifying information. Plaintiff shall continue to use the current caption of the case.”

— U.S. Magistrate Judge Sallie Kim

3.
Case No.: 4:26-cv-07688-ASK
Parties: Strike 3 Holdings, LLC v. John Doe subscriber assigned IP address 71.150.129.163
Judge: Ajay S. Krishnan
ISP: AT&T Internet
Works Infringed: 57
Location: Antioch, CA

4.
Case No.: 3:26-cv-07689-AGT
Parties: Strike 3 Holdings, LLC v. John Doe subscriber assigned IP address 99.7.60.190
Judge: Alex G. Tse
ISP: AT&T Internet
Works Infringed: 65
Location: Dublin, CA

5.
Case No.: 5:26-cv-07692-VKD
Parties: Strike 3 Holdings, LLC v. John Doe subscriber assigned IP address 172.9.237.127
Judge: Virginia K. DeMarchi
ISP: AT&T Internet
Works Infringed: 31
Location: Dublin, CA

6.
Case No.: 3:26-cv-07693-AGT
Parties: Strike 3 Holdings, LLC v. John Doe subscriber assigned IP address 45.27.25.24
Judge: Alex G. Tse
ISP: AT&T Internet
Works Infringed: 41
Location: Pleasanton, CA

7.
Case No.: 3:26-cv-07726-JSC
Parties: Strike 3 Holdings, LLC v. John Doe subscriber assigned IP address 71.202.175.38
Judge: Jacqueline Scott Corley
ISP: Comcast Cable
Works Infringed: 28
Location: San Francisco, CA

“Each subscriber and the ISP shall have 30 days from the date of service upon him, her, or it to file any motions in this Court contesting the subpoena (including a motion to quash or modify the subpoena). If the 30-day period lapses without the subscriber contesting the subpoena, the ISP shall have 10 days to produce to Plaintiff the information responsive to the subpoena with respect to that subscriber. The ISP shall not produce information to Plaintiff in response to the subpoena before the expiration of the above 40-day period. … Any name or other personal identifying information of any current or proposed defendant shall be filed UNDER SEAL in all court filings.”

— U.S. District Judge Jacqueline Scott Corley

8.
Case No.: 5:26-cv-07727-BLF
Parties: Strike 3 Holdings, LLC v. John Doe subscriber assigned IP address 73.241.11.117
Judge: Beth Labson Freeman / Magistrate Judge Nathanael M. Cousins
ISP: Comcast Cable
Works Infringed: 30
Location: Novato, CA

9.
Case No.: 3:26-cv-07728
Parties: Strike 3 Holdings, LLC v. John Doe subscriber assigned IP address 76.133.142.111
Judge: James Donato
ISP: Comcast Cable
Works Infringed: 41
Location: San Francisco, CA

10.
Case No.: 3:26-cv-07729
Parties: Strike 3 Holdings, LLC v. John Doe subscriber assigned IP address 98.51.89.194
Magistrate Judge: Thomas S. Hixson
ISP: Comcast Cable
Works Infringed: 27
Location: Millbrae, CA

“Plaintiff may not publicly disclose the information obtained based on this subpoena without leave of the Court—at least until the Doe defendant has had an opportunity to file a motion to proceed anonymously, or further discovery has been taken. All references to Defendant’s identity must be redacted and filed UNDER SEAL until further notice.”

— U.S. Magistrate Judge Thomas S. Hixson

11.
Case No.: 3:26-cv-07730
Parties: Strike 3 Holdings, LLC v. John Doe subscriber assigned IP address 73.170.24.9
Judge: Trina L. Thompson
ISP: Comcast Cable
Works Infringed: 48
Location: San Francisco, CA

12.
Case No.: 4:26-cv-07770
Parties: Strike 3 Holdings, LLC v. John Doe subscriber assigned IP address 71.204.190.109
ISP: Comcast Cable
Works Infringed: 46
Location: San Francisco, CA

13.
Case No.: 4:26-cv-07773
Parties: Strike 3 Holdings, LLC v. John Doe subscriber assigned IP address 98.51.90.32
ISP: Comcast Cable
Works Infringed: 61
Location: Millbrae, CA

14.
Case No.: 4:26-cv-07775
Parties: Strike 3 Holdings, LLC v. John Doe subscriber assigned IP address 98.51.4.221
Magistrate Judge: Ajay S. Krishnan
ISP: Comcast Cable
Works Infringed: 25
Location: San Francisco, CA

“Any name or other personal identifying information of any current or proposed defendant shall be filed UNDER SEAL in all court filings.”

— U.S. Magistrate Judge Ajay S. Krishnan

15.
Case No.: 3:26-cv-07776
Parties: Strike 3 Holdings, LLC v. John Doe subscriber assigned IP address 98.51.4.134
ISP: Comcast Cable
Works Infringed: 48
Location: San Francisco, CA

16.
Case No.: 3:26-cv-07778
Parties: Strike 3 Holdings, LLC v. John Doe subscriber assigned IP address 67.170.245.155
ISP: Comcast Cable
Works Infringed: 25
Location: Milpitas, CA

17.
Case No.: 5:26-cv-07779
Parties: Strike 3 Holdings, LLC v. John Doe subscriber assigned IP address 98.207.111.79
Magistrate Judge: Virginia K. DeMarchi
ISP: Comcast Cable
Works Infringed: 26
Location: San Jose, CA

“If Comcast produces information regarding the identity of the subscriber to Strike 3, Strike 3 shall not publicly disclose that information absent consent of the subscriber or leave of court.”

— U.S. Magistrate Judge Virginia K. DeMarchi

18.
Case No.: 3:26-cv-07781
Parties: Strike 3 Holdings, LLC v. John Doe subscriber assigned IP address 67.160.212.55
ISP: Comcast Cable
Works Infringed: 25
Location: San Jose, CA

19.
Case No.: 5:26-cv-07783
Parties: Strike 3 Holdings, LLC v. John Doe subscriber assigned IP address 73.252.158.107
ISP: Comcast Cable
Works Infringed: 41
Location: Sunnyvale, CA

20.
Case No.: 3:26-cv-07784
Parties: Strike 3 Holdings, LLC v. John Doe subscriber assigned IP address 67.188.180.147
ISP: Comcast Cable
Works Infringed: 46
Location: Pacific Grove, CA

21.
Case No.: 3:26-cv-07793
Parties: Strike 3 Holdings, LLC v. John Doe subscriber assigned IP address 73.231.179.140
ISP: Comcast Cable
Works Infringed: 28
Location: Mountain View, CA

22.
Case No.: 3:26-cv-07794
Parties: Strike 3 Holdings, LLC v. John Doe subscriber assigned IP address 73.241.203.2
Magistrate Judge: Joseph C. Spero
ISP: Comcast Cable
Works Infringed: 53
Location: Saratoga, CA

“ORDERED that any name or other personal identifying information of any current or proposed defendant shall be filed UNDER SEAL in all filings and not otherwise disclosed.”

— U.S. Magistrate Judge Joseph C. Spero

23.
Case No.: 4:26-cv-07795
Parties: Strike 3 Holdings, LLC v. John Doe subscriber assigned IP address 24.23.211.67
ISP: Comcast Cable
Works Infringed: 33
Location: Santa Clara, CA

24.
Case No.: 4:26-cv-07796
Parties: Strike 3 Holdings, LLC v. John Doe subscriber assigned IP address 24.23.151.184
ISP: Comcast Cable
Works Infringed: 45
Location: Santa Clara, CA

25.
Case No.: 5:26-cv-07797
Parties: Strike 3 Holdings, LLC v. John Doe subscriber assigned IP address 174.62.106.47
ISP: Comcast Cable
Works Infringed: 26
Location: Santa Clara, CA

26.
Case No.: 4:26-cv-07798
Parties: Strike 3 Holdings, LLC v. John Doe subscriber assigned IP address 67.188.237.157
Magistrate Judge: Kandis A. Westmore
ISP: Comcast Cable
Works Infringed: 34
Location: Santa Clara, CA

“ORDERED that any documents containing the name or other personal identifying information of any current or proposed defendant shall be filed under seal.”

— U.S. Magistrate Judge Kandis A. Westmore

27.
Case No.: 3:26-cv-07800
Parties: Strike 3 Holdings, LLC v. John Doe subscriber assigned IP address 73.15.210.87
Magistrate Judge: Alex G. Tse
ISP: Comcast Cable
Works Infringed: 53
Location: Los Gatos, CA

“Plaintiff may only use the information disclosed in response to a Rule 45 subpoena served on the ISP for the purpose of protecting and enforcing Plaintiff’s rights as set forth in its Complaint. Information disclosed by the ISP regarding Defendant’s identity shall be treated as confidential.”

— U.S. Magistrate Judge Alex G. Tse

28.
Case No.: 5:26-cv-07801
Parties: Strike 3 Holdings, LLC v. John Doe subscriber assigned IP address 174.62.127.97
District Judge: Eumi K. Lee
ISP: Comcast Cable
Works Infringed: 54

Location: Los Gatos, CA

“Because the ISP subscriber may not be the individual who allegedly infringed Strike 3’s copyright, and because of the potential embarrassment associated with being publicly accused of illegally downloading adult motion pictures, the Court finds good cause to issue the following limited protective order in this case: Any name(s) or personal identifying information produced in response to the third-party subpoena shall be treated as confidential and shall not be publicly disclosed until Defendant has had the opportunity to file a motion with this Court to proceed anonymously and the Court has ruled on that motion. If Defendant or any other third party fails to file a motion for leave to proceed anonymously within 30 days after receiving notice from Strike 3 that the ISP has produced their information, Strike 3 may file a motion seeking withdrawal or modification of this protective order.”

— U.S. District Judge Eumi K. Lee

This post is for informational purposes only and does not constitute legal advice. Every case is unique. Please consult qualified counsel about your specific situation.

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.