Summary
The United States District Court for the Southern District of New York denies the pro se plaintiff’s motion to proceed under a pseudonym. The court grants 30 days to file an amended complaint using the plaintiff’s real name and either pay the filing fees or submit a properly identifying application to proceed in forma pauperis. The order also states that failure to comply will result in dismissal without prejudice and denies the pending motions without prejudice.
Topics
Practice areas
Questions Presented
- Whether Plaintiff demonstrated sufficiently particularized and serious risks of harm to warrant proceeding under a pseudonym.
- Whether Plaintiff was required to amend the complaint using their real name, signature, and address.
- Whether Plaintiff had to pay the filing and administrative fees or submit an IFP application containing their real name, signature, and address.
Holdings
- Plaintiff failed to establish circumstances sufficient to overcome the presumption that court proceedings and filings should identify the parties publicly; the motion to proceed under a pseudonym was therefore denied.
- Plaintiff was required, within 30 days, to file an amended complaint bearing their real name, address, and signature, unless Plaintiff instead sought voluntary dismissal without prejudice.
- Within 30 days, Plaintiff had to either pay $405 in filing and administrative fees or submit a signed IFP application using their real name, address, and signature.
Key quotations
“This requirement . . . serves the vital purpose of facilitating public scrutiny of judicial proceedings and therefore cannot be set aside lightly.”
“The Court grants Plaintiff 30 days’ leave to file an amended complaint and IFP application with their real name, signature, and address.”
Factual background
Plaintiff alleged that Defendants and foreign investors or media producers had misappropriated creative works and personal medical information since 2001. Plaintiff asserted that the work involved sensitive personal and health-related data and claimed to fear retaliation, intimidation, emotional distress, and physical harm if their identity became public. The court found these allegations of potential retaliation and negative impact vague and insufficient to overcome the presumption of public access.
Procedural history
Plaintiff filed the action under the name “Juno (PKC), USA,” along with an application to proceed in forma pauperis and several motions. The court denied permission to proceed under a pseudonym, granted 30 days to file an amended complaint using Plaintiff’s real name and either pay the required fees or submit a properly identified IFP application, and stated that failure to comply would result in dismissal without prejudice. No summons would issue at that time, and the other pending motions were denied without prejudice.