Opinion
Civil Action No. 16-cv-03115-PAB-KMT
06-01-2017
JANE DOE, an individual, Plaintiff, v. UBER TECHNOLOGIES, INC., a Delaware corporation, UBER USA, LLC, a Delaware limited liability company, and RASIER, LLC, a Delaware limited liability company, Defendants.
ORDER
This matter is before the Court on plaintiff's Unopposed Motion to Proceed Under Pseudonym Jane Doe [Docket No. 26].
Plaintiff's allegations relate to an alleged sexual assault. Docket No. 26 at 2. Plaintiff claims that she would be harmed if not allowed to proceed under a pseudonym because "revealing her identity will harm her professional relationships and future aspirations" and that the public interest favors concealing the identity of sexual assault victims. Id. at 4.
The Court finds that this is one of the "exceptional cases involving matters of a highly sensitive and personal nature" where proceeding under a pseudonym is appropriate. Femedeer v. Haun, 227 F.3d 1244, 1246 (10th Cir. 2000) (quoting Doe v. Frank, 951 F.2d 320, 324 (11th Cir. 1992)). Further, in light of plaintiff's allegations, the Court finds that the public interest in knowing a litigant's identity does not outweigh the plaintiff's privacy interests. See M.M. v. Zavaras, 139 F.3d 798, 802 (10th Cir. 1998) (discussing Lindsey v. Dayton-Hudson Corp., 592 F.2d 1118 (10th Cir. 1979)). Therefore, the Court will grant plaintiff's request to proceed under the pseudonym Jane Doe.
For the foregoing reasons, it is
ORDERED that plaintiff's Unopposed Motion to Proceed Under Pseudonym Jane Doe [Docket No. 26] is GRANTED.
DATED June 1, 2017.
BY THE COURT:
s/Philip A. Brimmer
PHILIP A. BRIMMER
United States District Judge