Roe
Roe v. Bright
Opinion
Opinion
NOT FOR PUBLICATION FILED
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS MAY 14 2025
MOLLY C. DWYER, CLERK
U.S. COURT OF APPEALS
FOR THE NINTH CIRCUIT
RICHARD ROE, No. 24-1316 D.C. No. 6:24-cv-00012-DWM Plaintiff - Appellant,
v. MEMORANDUM*
CAROLYNN BRIGHT; DOES, 1-9,
Defendants - Appellees.
Appeal from the United States District Court for the District of Montana Donald W. Molloy, District Judge, Presiding
Submitted April 22, 2025**
Before: TASHIMA, GRABER, and H.A. THOMAS, Circuit Judges.
Richard Roe appeals pro se from the district court’s order denying Roe’s
motion for a protective order seeking leave to proceed under a pseudonym and seal
all records revealing his identity or information about his juvenile record. We have
jurisdiction under 28 U.S.C. § 1291 and the collateral order doctrine. Oliner v.
* This disposition is not appropriate for publication and is not precedent except as provided by Ninth Circuit Rule 36-3. ** The panel unanimously concludes this case is suitable for decision without oral argument. See Fed. R. App. P. 34(a)(2).…