Opinion ID: 168608
Heading Depth: 2
Heading Rank: 4

Heading: Use of a Pseudonym

Text: Finally, M r. Raiser challenges the district court’s denial of his motion for sanctions against the Church for revealing his identity while his motion to use a pseudonym was still under consideration. The district court ultimately denied M r. Raiser’s motion to use a pseudonym, and another panel of this court affirmed, observing that Raiser I also included an unsuccessful interlocutory appeal on the pseudonym issue, and that afterward M r. Raiser’s identity remained in the public domain in connection with the litigation. See Raiser v. Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-D ay Saints, 182 F. App’x 810, 811 (10th Cir. 2006). The district court did not abuse its discretion in denying the motion for sanctions. See Australian Gold, Inc. v. Hatfield, 436 F.3d 1228, 1243 (10th Cir. 2006) (“[W]e review a district court’s decision whether or not to impose sanctions . . . for an abuse of discretion.”). The judgment of the district court is AFFIRMED. 2 Entered for the Court Harris L Hartz