LK v. United States Citizenship and Immigration Services ( 2024 )

1 2 3 4 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 5 NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA 6 7 L K, Case No. 24-cv-00675-LJC 8 Plaintiff, ORDER RE: MOTION FOR LEAVE TO 9 v. PROCEED ANONYMOUSLY 10 UNITED STATES CITIZENSHIP AND Re: ECF No. 3 IMMIGRATION SERVICES, et al., 11 Defendants. 12 13 On February 5, 2024, Plaintiff L.K. filed his Complaint seeking, inter alia, a writ of 14 mandamus compelling Defendants to schedule an asylum interview and make a determination on 15 Plaintiff’s asylum application without further delay. ECF No. 1 (Compl.) ¶¶ 72–78. Plaintiff 16 concurrently filed a Motion for Leave to Proceed Anonymously. ECF No. 3. Defendants have not 17 responded to the motion, nor have they appeared in this matter. 18 “The normal presumption in litigation is that parties must use their real names.” Doe v. 19 Kamehameha Sch./Bernice Pauahi Bishop Estate, 596 F.3d 1036, 1042 (9th Cir. 2010); see also 20 Fed. R. Civ. P. 10(a) (stating that “title of the complaint must name all the parties.”) Although the 21 Ninth Circuit recognizes that the “use of fictitious names runs afoul of the public’s common law 22 right of access to judicial proceedings,” it has “permitted parties to proceed anonymously when 23 special circumstances justify secrecy.” Does I through XXIII v. Advanced Textile, 214 F.3d 1058, 24 1067-68 (9th Cir. 2000). Parties are allowed to use pseudonyms “in the unusual case when 25 nondisclosure of the party’s identity is necessary to protect a person from harassment, injury, 26 ridicule or personal embarrassment.” Id. at 1067–68 (alterations adopted and quotations omitted). 27 Specifically, “a party may preserve his or her anonymity in judicial proceedings in special 1 the public’s interest in knowing the party’s identity.” Id. at 1068. “Applying this balancing test, 2 courts [in other districts and circuits] have permitted [parties] to use pseudonyms” in certain 3 specific situations, for example, “when identification creates a risk of retaliatory physical or 4 mental harm…” Id. 5 Here, Plaintiff bases his motion on the risk to his safety, as a member of the Kurdish 6 minority, from public disclosure of his application for asylum if he is forced to return to Turkey. 7 ECF No. 3 at 2–3. Plaintiff also argues that there is a risk to his family, who continue to reside in 8 Turkey, and who may be targeted because of their connection to him. Id. Plaintiff’s “fears here 9 appear reasonable.” N.A. v. Jaddou, No. 23-CV-01634-AJB-BGS, 2023 WL 6238007, at *1 (S.D. 10 Cal. Sept. 25, 2023) (granting motion to proceed anonymously where the plaintiff and his family, 11 who were members of the Shi’ite minority in Pakistan, were at risk of harm “if their participation 12 in the instant case [became] known to the Pakistani Taliban.”) 13 However, based on the record before it, the Court cannot conclusively determine whether 14 allowing Plaintiff to proceed anonymously would prejudice Defendants, or whether the public 15 interest requires disclosure of Plaintiff’s true identity. First, Plaintiff says that his counsel has 16 “disclosed to Defendants Plaintiff’s identity and the filing receipt number for his asylum 17 application,” and thus, “there will be no prejudice to Defendants if Plaintiff proceeds 18 anonymously.” ECF No. 3 at 3. But Plaintiff has not filed anything to corroborate his claim that 19 Defendants have already been informed of his identity, and more specifically, that he is the one 20 bringing this lawsuit against them. See Civ. L.R. 7-5 (“Factual contentions made in support of 21 . . . any motion must be supported by an affidavit or declaration and by appropriate references to 22 the record.”) Plaintiff filed the Complaint only with his initials, meaning that even if he files proof 23 of service indicating they have been served with summons and a copy of the Complaint, that will 24 not establish that Defendants “already know[] who has sued [them].” Doe v. Lee, No. C 13-04029 25 LB, 2014 WL 630936, at *3 (N.D. Cal. Feb. 18, 2014) (finding no prejudice to the defendant in 26 allowing the plaintiff to proceed pseudonymously where the plaintiff “initially filed her 27 [c]omplaint under her true name in the public record, and she served the [d]efendant with a copy 1 Defendants or the Court,” the fact that the Complaint is filed only with Plaintiff's initials means 2 that the Court is unaware of who Plaintiff is. 2023 WL 6238007, at *1 (emphasis added). 3 || Without knowing Plaintiff's identity, the Court cannot make the determination as to whether his 4 || “name and identity...affect the resolution of the legal claims in [] this case,” such that the public 5 interest would require disclosure of his identity. Jd. 6 The Court will defer ruling on the Motion for Leave to Proceed Anonymously. No later 7 || than fourteen days from the date of this Order, Plaintiff shall file evidentiary support establishing 8 that Defendants have been informed of his true identity, and he shall also disclose his true identity 9 to the Court. Plaintiff can file his documents with an accompanying motion to seal pursuant to 10 || Local Rule 79-5. Instructions for e-filing under seal in Civil Cases are available at 11 https://www.cand.uscourts. gov/cases-e-filing/cm-ecf/e-filing-my-documents/e-filing-under-seal/. 12 IT IS SO ORDERED. 13 Dated: February 20, 2024 14 □□ Zt so 2 LISA ¥ CISNEROS = 16 Ligh CISD Magistrate Judge 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28