A. v. Lehman

W.D. Washington

A. v. Lehman

DecidedJuly 2, 2024

Docket2:24-cv-00849

StatusUnknown

This text of A. v. Lehman (A. v. Lehman) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering District Court, W.D. Washington primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook

A. v. Lehman, (W.D. Wash. 2024).

Pincite

Opinion

7 BEFORE THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE WESTERN DISTRICT OF WASHINGTON 8 IN SEATTLE

9 W. A. et al., No. 2:24-cv-00849-JHC 10 Plaintiffs, Order 11 v.

12 Danielle Lehman et al.,

13 Defendants.

14 Upon consideration of Plaintiffs’ Motion for a Protective Order, Dkt. # 3, it is hereby 15 ordered that named Plaintiffs be identified by the first initial of their first and last names 16 throughout this litigation and that their true names not be revealed in any publicly available 17 documents. See Does I thru XXIII v. Advanced Textile Corp., 214 F.3d 1058, 1068 (9th Cir. 18 2000) (“[A] party may preserve his or her anonymity in judicial proceedings in special 19 circumstances when the party’s need for anonymity outweighs prejudice to the opposing party 20 and the public’s interest in knowing the part’s identity.”); see also Doe v. Gonzales, 484 F.3d 21 445, 446 (7th Cir. 2007) (noting that asylum applicant was permitted to proceed under a 22 pseudonym “because of his fear that if he is returned to El Salvador he will be killed”); Doe v. 23 I.N.S., 867 F.2d 285, 286 n.1 (6th Cir. 1989) (noting that for an asylum applicant, “[a]though ] the use of pseudonyms 1s not favored, we have resorted to it here to protect the petitioner’s 2 family, who remain in China, from possible reprisals”). 3 It is also ordered 8 C.F.R. § 208.6 and 8 C.F.R. § 1208.6 shall remain in effect to protect 4 Plaintiffs’ identities as applicants for asylum from public disclosure. 5 Dated this 2"¢ day of July 2024. 6

John H. Chun 8 United States District Judge 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23

Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI

7 BEFORE THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE WESTERN DISTRICT OF WASHINGTON 8 IN SEATTLE

9 W. A. et al., No. 2:24-cv-00849-JHC 10 Plaintiffs, Order 11 v.

12 Danielle Lehman et al.,

13 Defendants.

14 Upon consideration of Plaintiffs’ Motion for a Protective Order, Dkt. # 3, it is hereby 15 ordered that named Plaintiffs be identified by the first initial of their first and last names 16 throughout this litigation and that their true names not be revealed in any publicly available 17 documents. See Does I thru XXIII v. Advanced Textile Corp., 214 F.3d 1058, 1068 (9th Cir. 18 2000) (“[A] party may preserve his or her anonymity in judicial proceedings in special 19 circumstances when the party’s need for anonymity outweighs prejudice to the opposing party 20 and the public’s interest in knowing the part’s identity.”); see also Doe v. Gonzales, 484 F.3d 21 445, 446 (7th Cir. 2007) (noting that asylum applicant was permitted to proceed under a 22 pseudonym “because of his fear that if he is returned to El Salvador he will be killed”); Doe v. 23 I.N.S., 867 F.2d 285, 286 n.1 (6th Cir. 1989) (noting that for an asylum applicant, “[a]though ] the use of pseudonyms 1s not favored, we have resorted to it here to protect the petitioner’s 2 family, who remain in China, from possible reprisals”). 3 It is also ordered 8 C.F.R. § 208.6 and 8 C.F.R. § 1208.6 shall remain in effect to protect 4 Plaintiffs’ identities as applicants for asylum from public disclosure. 5 Dated this 2"¢ day of July 2024. 6

John H. Chun 8 United States District Judge 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

A. v. Lehman, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/a-v-lehman-wawd-2024.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack