Just when we were all recovering from that 305-case ambush across the country, the Strike 3 Holdings litigation machine decided it was time for a return to its Hollywood roots. Over the course of October 10th and 11th, 2025, a surgical strike of 16 new federal copyright lawsuits hit one specific location: the California Central District Court (CACD).
Forget the scattergun approach; this is a focused, high-precision operation. Every one of these cases targets an anonymous “John Doe” subscriber, identified only by their IP address, for copyright infringement. It’s a reminder that even as the “gravy train” expands its tracks nationwide, sometimes you just have to go home to where the biggest settlements are waiting.
The Spotlight Shines on Lincoln D Bandlow
If Strike 3 Holdings has a star director for its litigation in the CACD, it’s attorney Lincoln D Bandlow. These kinds of concentrated filings in the heart of the media world are often associated with his firm’s work.
Bandlow is known for expertly navigating the complicated and crowded legal landscape of the California Central District. When you see a tight cluster of filings like this—all aimed at turning an anonymous IP address into a settlement check—you know the operation is being run by someone who understands the local courts and judges intimately. For the 16 new “John Doe” defendants in Southern California, this means they’re facing a lawyer who knows exactly how to play the game on his home turf.
The sheer volume of these continuous filings shows that despite public outcry and media attention, the legal maneuver of using an IP address to pressure an account holder into a settlement remains alive and well.
For those facing this precise legal tactic in California, hearing from experts who have analyzed the strategy is essential. We recommend watching the analysis below, which dives into the methods used in these high-volume cases:
Watch an analysis of this high-volume legal strategy
| Case Name | Case Number | Filing Date | IP Address |
| Strike 3 Holdings, LLC v. John Doe | (2:25-cv-09712) | Oct 10, 2025 | 76.176.17.50 |
| Strike 3 Holdings, LLC v. John Doe | (2:25-cv-09711) | Oct 10, 2025 | 47.28.79.15 |
| Strike 3 Holdings, LLC v. John Doe | (2:25-cv-09710) | Oct 10, 2025 | 38.42.46.76 |
| Strike 3 Holdings, LLC v. John Doe | (2:25-cv-09709) | Oct 10, 2025 | 172.91.71.229 |
| Strike 3 Holdings, LLC v. John Doe | (2:25-cv-09708) | Oct 10, 2025 | 172.249.177.70 |
| Strike 3 Holdings, LLC v. John Doe | (2:25-cv-09763) | Oct 10, 2025 | 76.168.118.130 |
| Strike 3 Holdings, LLC v. John Doe | (2:25-cv-09764) | Oct 10, 2025 | 76.170.65.185 |
| Strike 3 Holdings, LLC v. John Doe | (5:25-cv-02683) | Oct 10, 2025 | 47.153.123.40 |
| Strike 3 Holdings, LLC v. John Doe | (5:25-cv-02686) | Oct 11, 2025 | 47.149.86.143 |
| Strike 3 Holdings, LLC v. John Doe | (8:25-cv-02302) | Oct 11, 2025 | 75.82.215.110 |
| Strike 3 Holdings, LLC v. John Doe | (5:25-cv-02685) | Oct 11, 2025 | 47.152.88.98 |
| Strike 3 Holdings, LLC v. John Doe | (5:25-cv-02687) | Oct 11, 2025 | 47.151.248.77 |
| Strike 3 Holdings, LLC v. John Doe | (5:25-cv-02684) | Oct 11, 2025 | 172.251.134.19 |
| Strike 3 Holdings, LLC v. John Doe | (8:25-cv-02301) | Oct 11, 2025 | 76.91.74.153 |
| Strike 3 Holdings, LLC v. John Doe | (8:25-cv-02303) | Oct 11, 2025 | 47.157.252.36 |
| Strike 3 Holdings, LLC v. John Doe | (8:25-cv-02300) | Oct 11, 2025 | 47.150.219.187 |
Strike 3 Litigation 
Leave a comment