Patrick Collins, Inc. v. John Does 1-5

Filing 19

MINUTE ORDER denying without prejudice 17 John Doe #3's Motion to Quash, by Magistrate Judge Michael E. Hegarty on 02/06/13. (alvsl)

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
FOR THE DISTRICT OF COLORADO
Civil Action No. 12-cv-03166-RBJ-MEH
PATRICK COLLINS, INC.,
Plaintiff,
v.
JOHN DOES 1-5,
Defendants.

MINUTE ORDER
Entered by Michael E. Hegarty, United States Magistrate Judge, on February 6, 2013.
The “Motion to Quash or Vacate Subpoena” filed by John Doe #3 [filed February 5, 2013;
docket #17] is denied without prejudice for the following reasons.
First, the motion fails to comply with Fed. R. Civ. P. 11(a), which states in pertinent part,
Every pleading, written motion, and other paper must be signed by at least one
attorney of record in the attorney’s name – or by a party personally if the party is
unrepresented. The paper must state the signer’s address, email address, and
telephone number.
From the content of the present motion, the Court infers that Defendant John Doe #3 seeks to
proceed in this litigation anonymously. However, he has failed to properly seek permission from
the Court to do so. See K-Beech, Inc. v. Does 1-29, 826 F. Supp. 2d 903, 905 (W.D.N.C. 2011)
(noting that a party who wishes to proceed anonymously may overcome the presumption against
anonymous proceedings by filing a well-reasoned motion to proceed anonymously); see also West
Coast Prods., Inc. v. Does 1-5829, 275 F.R.D. 9, 12 (D.D.C. 2011) (“federal courts generally allow
parties to proceed anonymously only under certain special circumstances when anonymity is
necessary to protect a person from harassment, injury, ridicule or personal embarrassment”).
Therefore, if Defendant John Doe #3 wishes to re-file his motion in accordance with this order and
all applicable local and federal court rules, he may do so on or before February 20, 2013 and must
first (or contemporaneously) file a motion to proceed anonymously in accordance with Rule 11(a).1
With such filing, Defendant must provide to the Court his name, address, telephone number and

1

In addition to compliance with Rule 11, the Court also notes the necessity of having such
information for the proper and efficient management of its docket.

email address in the form of a separate written “supplement” to the motion. If Defendant wishes to
keep this supplement (containing his identifying information) confidential, he may file a motion to
file the supplement under restriction pursuant to the procedure set forth in D.C. Colo. LCivR 7.2.
The Court may strike any motion or other filing that deviates from the requirements of this order or
from those set forth in the applicable local or federal rules.
Second, John Doe #3 failed to file a copy of the subpoena at issue with the present motion
for the Court’s consideration. Therefore, the Court orders that John Doe #3 attach a copy of the
challenged subpoena to any renewed motion to quash he may file.

2