Doe

Doe v. Rodriguez

Good Law
United States District Court, Eastern District of CaliforniaDecember 12, 20221:22-cv-01569California1,083 words

Opinion

trial_court Opinion

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

8 9 EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA 10 JANE DOE, Case No. 1:22-cv-01569-JLT-SAB 11 Plaintiff, ORDER GRANTING PLAINTIFF’S 12 MOTION TO PROCEED v. PSEUDONYMOUSLY WITHOUT 13 PREJUDICE TO RECONSIDERATION GREG RODRIGUEZ, et al., WHEN DEFENDANTS APPEAR AND 14 REQUIRING DEFENDANTS TO FILE Defendants. OPPOSITION OR STATEMENT OF NON- 15 OPPOSITION WITHIN TWENTY-ONE

DAYS OF APPEARANCE

16 (ECF No. 6) 17 18 I. 19 INTRODUCTION 20 On December 5, 2022, Jane Doe (“Plaintiff”), filed this action. (ECF No. 1.) On 21 December 6, 2022, Plaintiff filed an ex parte motion to proceed by pseudonym. (ECF No. 6.) 22 On December 8, 2022, this action was reassigned from Magistrate Judge Gary Austin to 23 Magistrate Judge Stanley A. Boone. (ECF No. 7.) For the reasons explained herein, the Court 24 shall grant the Plaintiff’s motion to proceed by…

Sign in to read the full opinion

Create a free account to read the complete opinion text, citation history, and good-law status for this case.