Stray Kids’ Felix has taken a decisive legal step against anonymous online defamation—and a U.S. federal judge has backed him. On Sept. 5, 2025, Judge Beth Labson Freeman of the U.S. District Court for the Northern District of California granted Felix (legal name: Felix Yongbok Lee) permission to subpoena X (formerly Twitter) for information identifying the user behind posts accusing him of mistreating staff. The order was issued under 28 U.S.C. §1782, a statute that lets U.S. courts assist with evidence-gathering for use in foreign cases.

What the court actually ordered

The judge authorized Felix to serve X with a narrowly tailored document subpoena seeking personal identifying information (PII) sufficient to identify the anonymous account, for use in his ongoing civil defamation lawsuit in Korea. The court noted that X is not a participant in the Korean case and that Korean courts are receptive to U.S. judicial assistance for discovery like this.

The rumor—and why this matters legally

At the heart of the dispute are posts claiming Felix “treated staff like servants” and “acted like a prince.” In filings, Felix’s team said the statements were false and caused him mental distress, physical stress, and reputational harm. He has already filed a defamation suit in the Seoul Eastern District Court, but couldn’t move forward because the defendant’s identity was unknown—hence the U.S. application to identify the user via X.

Dates, timeline, and reporting

K-pop outlets that reviewed the filings reported that the posts were made on March 8, March 15, and May 24, 2025. Those details, along with the U.S. court’s use of §1782 to authorize the subpoena to X, have been widely covered in Korean-wave media roundups.

A quick explainer: What is §1782?

Section 1782 doesn’t decide who’s right or wrong about the underlying rumor. Instead, it lets a U.S. court order a person or company “found” in its district (here, X Corp. in N.D. Cal.) to produce evidence for use in a foreign proceeding (here, Felix’s civil case in Seoul). Courts then apply discretionary Intel factors (e.g., receptivity of the foreign court; whether the request is intrusive) to decide whether to grant the application. Judge Freeman found those factors favored Felix and granted limited discovery.

What happens next

• Service & production: Felix’s counsel will serve X with the order and subpoena. X can comply, or any affected party could still move to quash or modify the subpoena—standard procedure in these cases.
• Identification in Korea: If X produces usable PII, Felix can amend and press his Korean case against a named defendant instead of a “John Doe.”
• No merits ruling—yet: The U.S. court did not rule on whether the posts were defamatory; it only allowed targeted discovery to aid the Korean lawsuit.

Why this is a big deal for K-pop (and fandom spaces)

This order underscores how idols—and anyone targeted by anonymous accounts—can use a U.S. subpoena to pierce anonymity when there’s a live case abroad and the platform is within U.S. jurisdiction. For K-pop specifically, it signals a maturing legal playbook against cross-border rumor-mongering: file the civil case at home, then use §1782 in the U.S. to identify the poster and proceed on the merits.

The bottom line

Felix didn’t “win” a defamation judgment; he won a crucial discovery order. That step is often the difference between a stalled case and a real path to accountability. As this moves forward, all eyes will be on whether X’s records allow Korean courts to evaluate the claims—and on how this tactic shapes future anti-defamation efforts in the K-pop industry.