Source: s3://data.kl3m.ai/documents/govinfo/USCOURTS/USCOURTS-cand-3_16-cv-02298/USCOURTS-cand-3_16-cv-02298-0/pdf.json

Nature of Suit Code: 791
Nature of Suit: Employee Retirement Income Security Act (ERISA)
Cause of Action: 29:1132 E.R.I.S.A.: Employee Benefits

---

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25

26

27

28

United States District Court

Northern District of California

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

JANE DOE,

Plaintiff,

v.

METROPOLITAN LIFE INSURANCE 

COMPANY,

Defendant.

Case No. 16-cv-02298-MEJ 

ORDER RE: PERMISSION TO 

PROCEED UNDER PSEUDONYM

Plaintiff Jane Doe filed this case on April 27, 2016 using a pseudonym. Ordinarily, 

pleadings must identify the parties to a suit. Fed. R. Civ. P. 10(a). Nevertheless, “a party may 

preserve his or her anonymity in judicial proceedings in special circumstances when the party’s 

need for anonymity outweighs prejudice to the opposing party and the public’s interest in knowing 

the party’s identity.” Does I through XXIII v. Advanced Textile Corp., 214 F.3d 1058, 1068 (9th 

Cir. 2000). In evaluating the need for anonymity, the Court considers (1) the severity of the 

threatened harm, (2) the reasonableness of the anonymous party’s fears, (3) the anonymous party’s 

vulnerability to retaliation; and (4) the prejudice to the opposing party and whether proceedings 

may be structured to avoid that prejudice. Id. Additionally, the Court “must decide whether the 

public’s interest in the case would be best served by requiring that the litigants reveal their 

identities.” Id. 

Accordingly, prior to the issuance of summons in this case, the Court ORDERS Plaintiff 

to file a motion for leave to proceed under the Jane Doe pseudonym. 

IT IS SO ORDERED.

Dated: May 11, 2016

______________________________________

MARIA-ELENA JAMES

United States Magistrate Judge

Case 3:16-cv-02298-JST Document 6 Filed 05/11/16 Page 1 of 1