PAUPER v. RATCLIFFE
District Of Columbia District Court | |
Case #: | 1:25-cv-00773 |
Nature of Suit | 790 Labor - Other Labor Litigation |
Cause | 42:1983 Civil Rights (Employment Discrimination) |
Case Filed: | Mar 17, 2025 |
Last checked: Monday Mar 17, 2025 3:05 PM EDT |
Defendant
AMBER ASKEW
|
Represented By
|
Defendant
CENTRAL INTELLIGENCE AGENCY, (CIA)
|
Docket last updated: 6 hours ago |
Tuesday, March 18, 2025 | ||
3 | 3
![]() NOTICE of Voluntary Dismissal by MARGARET A. PAUPER (Lewis, Dionna) |
|
notice
Notice of Error- New Case
Tue 03/18 9:31 AM
NOTICE OF NEW CASE ERROR regarding1 Complaint,. The following error(s) need correction: Invalid signature on Civil Cover Sheet. Please file the signed document using the event Errata. All filings must have an original signature or /s/ Attorney Name to represent an electronic signature of the filer. Civil Cover Sheet filed as fillable PDF. Please file form in a non-fillable PDF format. Missing summonses- U.S. government. When naming a U.S. government agent or agency as a defendant, you must supply a summons for each defendant & two additional summonses for the U.S. Attorney & U.S. Attorney General. Please submit using the event Request for Summons to Issue. COMPLIANCE DEADLINE is by close of business today. This case will not proceed any further until all errors are satisfied. (znmw) |
||
order
Order on Sealed Motion for Leave to File Complaint Under Seal Order on Sealed Motion to Proceed Under Pseudonym
Tue 03/18 2:24 PM
MINUTE ORDER: The Court ORDERS that: 1) Plaintiff's2 Motion to Proceed Under Pseudonym is DENIED WITHOUT PREJUDICE as it does not address the five-factor inquiry that applies to such motions, see In re Sealed Case , 971 F.3d 324, 326-27 (D.C. Cir. 2020); 2) Plaintiff's2 Motion to Seal the Complaint is DENIED WITHOUT PREJUDICE as it does not address the six-factor inquiry that applies to motions to seal court records, see United States v. Hubbard , 650 F.2d 293, 317-22 (D.C. Cir. 1980); 3) Within fourteen days of this Order, Plaintiff shall file either a new motion that addresses the factors identified in In re Sealed Case and Hubbard or a Notice advising the Clerk of the Court whether she wishes to proceed under her true name and with filing her Complaint on the public docket, and, if so, she shall also file her2 Motion on the public docket; and 4) If Plaintiff does not file a new motion or such Notice within fourteen days, the Clerk is directed to terminate the case. The factors identified in In re Sealed Case are: 1) whether the justification asserted by the requesting party is merely to avoid the annoyance and criticism that may attend any litigation or is to preserve privacy in a matter of a sensitive and highly personal nature; 2) whether identification poses a risk of retaliatory physical or mental harm to the requesting party or, even more critically, to innocent non-parties; 3) the ages of the persons whose privacy interests are sought to be protected; 4) whether the action is against a governmental or private party; and, relatedly, 5) the risk of unfairness to the opposing party from allowing an action against it to proceed anonymously. The factors identified in Hubbard are: 1) the need for public access to the documents at issue; 2) the extent of previous public access to the documents; 3) whether someone has objected to disclosure, and the identity of that person; 4) the strength of any property and privacy interests asserted; 5) the possibility of prejudice to those opposing disclosure; and 6) the purposes for which the documents were introduced during the judicial proceedings. So ORDERED by Chief Judge James E. Boasberg on 3/18/2025. (lcjeb4) |
||
Monday, March 17, 2025 | ||
2 | 2
![]() SEALED MOTION FOR LEAVE TO FILE COMPLAINT UNDER SEAL filed by AMBER ASKEW., SEALED MOTION to Proceed Under Pseudonym filed by AMBER ASKEW(Lewis, Dionna) |
|
Att: 1
![]() |
||
Att: 2
![]() |