Person Doe v. Federal Bureau of Prisons

Background

On July 10, 2023, J.S.2 filed, without a lawyer, a petition for a custody-related court order under 28 U.S.C. § 2241. The respondents were the Federal Bureau of Prisons and the Warden of FCI. J.S.2 also asked that the petition, other filings submitted at the same time, future filings related to the case, and the entire docket be kept under seal. J.S.2 had not separately asked for permission to proceed under a pseudonym, so the court addressed that issue first.

Pseudonym decision

The court explained that court rules generally require a case title to identify all parties, but courts may allow a party to proceed anonymously in limited circumstances. It applied the balancing approach used by the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit, considering matters such as the sensitivity of the issues, possible harm from disclosure, vulnerability, whether the case challenges government conduct, possible prejudice to the respondents, whether the identity has remained confidential, the public interest, and alternative ways to protect confidentiality.

Based on those factors, the court found that allowing J.S.2 to proceed under a pseudonym was appropriate.

Sealing and disposition

After reviewing J.S.2’s sealing request and the entire docket, the court concluded that the interests in sealing the materials outweighed the usual presumption that court records should be publicly accessible. The court ordered that J.S.2’s submissions to date—ECF Nos. 1–4 and 8—and the docket remain under seal until further order of the court.

The clerk was directed to terminate the motion at ECF No. 3, mail J.S.2 a copy of the order, and avoid revealing J.S.2’s identification number or mailing address in mailings or on the public electronic docket. Judge Torres’s order addressed anonymity and confidentiality; it did not decide the underlying petition.