Anonymous v. Anonymous et al.

Filing 19

ORDER If Petitioner wishes to continue prosecuting this case anonymously, she shall, by June 7, 2024, file on the docket, in four separate PDF files (a) the redacted version of ECF 2; (b) the redacted version of ECF 11; (c) a version of ECF 6 tha t is redacted in the manner described in this order; and (d) a version of ECF 13 that is redacted in the manner described in this order. If she does so, the original versions of the redacted documents she submits shall remain sealed, while the reda cted versions will be unsealed and made available to the public. If she does not wish to proceed with this case because of this order or any of my prior rulings, she shall, by June 7, 2024, file on the docket a notice of voluntary dismissal pursuant to Rule 41(a)(1)(A)(i) of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure. (And as further set forth herein.) SO ORDERED. (Signed by Magistrate Judge Robyn F. Tarnofsky on 6/3/2024) (jca)

Download PDF
THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF NEW YORK Anonymous, Petitioner, 24-CV-3495 (JHR) (RFT) ORDER -againstAnonymous, et al., Respondents. ROBYN F. TARNOFSKY, United States Magistrate Judge: My order of May 24, 2024 stated that if Petitioner wished to continue prosecuting this case anonymously, then she was required to file on the docket redacted versions of ECF 2, ECF 6, ECF 11, and ECF 13. (See ECF 17.) That order permitted Petitioner to redact her own name (including her signature) and personal identifying information. (See id.) It did not permit Petitioner to redact any other information, including the names of her doctors, care team, or hospital employees. Petitioner’s own personal identifying information, which may be redacted, includes her social security number and date of birth; it does not include her medical diagnoses. On May 28, 2024, Petitioner attempted to comply with my order by submitting redacted versions of ECF 2, ECF 6, ECF 11, and ECF 13 (“Redacted Documents”) (See ECF 18.) That filing combines redacted versions of four different docket entries, but each redacted document needs to be filed as a separate PDF file. More significantly, I have reviewed the Redacted Documents and determined that Petitioner has improperly redacted ECF 6 (see ECF 18 at 8-26) (“Redacted ECF 6”) and ECF 11 (see ECF 18 at 27-36) (“Redacted ECF 11”) by redacting information beyond her name and personal identifying information. Specifically, Petitioner has improperly redacted the entirety of multiple pages of Redacted ECF 6, including information that goes beyond her name and personal identifying information. (See ECF 18 at 17-21.) Petitioner has improperly redacted the names of her “Care Team and Recent Providers” and hospital staff members. (See id. at 11, 13.) And she has improperly redacted other information. (See id. at 12, 14.) In Redacted ECF 11, Plaintiff has improperly redacted the majority or entirety of a paragraph in two locations. (See ECF 18 at 27, 36.) Additionally, Petitioner has redacted language that may refer to personal identifying information in the abstract but that does not actually reveal her personal identifying information. (See id. at 29.) If Petitioner wishes to continue prosecuting this case anonymously, she shall, by June 7, 2024, file on the docket, in four separate PDF files (a) the redacted version of ECF 2; (b) the redacted version of ECF 11; (c) a version of ECF 6 that is redacted in the manner described in this order; and (d) a version of ECF 13 that is redacted in the manner described in this order. If she does so, the original versions of the redacted documents she submits shall remain sealed, while the redacted versions will be unsealed and made available to the public. If she does not wish to proceed with this case because of this order or any of my prior rulings, she shall, by June 7, 2024, file on the docket a notice of voluntary dismissal pursuant to Rule 41(a)(1)(A)(i) of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure. DATED: June 3, 2024 New York, NY SO ORDERED. __________________________ ROBYN F. TARNOFSKY United States Magistrate Judge 2

Disclaimer: Justia Dockets & Filings provides public litigation records from the federal appellate and district courts. These filings and docket sheets should not be considered findings of fact or liability, nor do they necessarily reflect the view of Justia.


Why Is My Information Online?