In Re Meta Pixel Healthcare Litigation

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA 6 Case No. 22-cv-03580-WHO

IN RE META PIXEL HEALTHCARE ORDER DENYING DEFENDANT’S

LITIGATION MOTION Re: Dkt. No. 812

Defendant Meta Platforms, Inc. moves to compel the Doe plaintiffs to proceed using their identities. Dkt. No. 812. This matter is appropriate for resolution on the papers under Civil L.R. 7-1(b). The March 26, 2025 hearing is VACATED. Meta’s motion is DENIED.1 Rule 10 requires that “the title of the complaint must name all the parties.” Fed.R.Civ.P. 10(a). This rule reflects the “paramount importance of open courts” and the “default presumption is that plaintiffs will use their true names.” Doe v. Kamehameha Sch./Bernice Pauahi Bishop Estate, 596 F.3d 1036, 1046 (9th Cir.2010). “As a general rule, the identity of the parties in any action, civil or criminal, should not be concealed except in an unusual case, where there is a need for the cloak of anonymity.” United States v.…