J.M.
J.M. v. Red Roof Franchising, LLC
Opinion
trial_court Opinion
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 9 FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA 10 11 J.M., No. 2:24-cv-03384-KJM-JDP 12 Plaintiff, ORDER 13 v. 14 Red Roof Franchising, LLC, et al., 1S Defendants. 16 17 Plaintiff seeks permission to use a pseudonym (the initials “J.M.”) in this action and to 18 | amend her complaint. See Pseudonym Mot., ECF No. 2; Mot. Am., ECF No. 20. Defendant Red 19 | Roof Franchising, LLC does not oppose either motion. See Notices, ECF Nos. 29-30. Defendant 20 | PDK Hospitality, LLC was served with summons in this action, but it has not appeared, and it has 21 | filed no response to plaintiff's motions. See Summons, ECF No. 3; Proof of Serv., ECF No. 16. 22 | As explained in this order, the court grants both motions. 23 Parties must normally “use their real names” in federal courts. Doe v. Kamehameha 24 | Sch./Bernice Pauahi Bishop Est., 596 F.3d 1036, 1042 (9th Cir. 2010). This presumption 25 | implements the public’s “general right to inspect and copy…