1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 9 FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA 10 11 JULIO F. V., Case No.: 1:25-cv-01432-KES-SKO (HC) 12 Petitioner, ORDER GRANTING PETITIONER’S REQUEST TO PROCEED UNDER 13 v. PSEUDONYM AND FOR PROTECTIVE ORDER 14 CHRISTOPHER CHESTNUT, Warden of California City Detention Facility, et al., [Doc. 2] 15 Respondents. 16

17 18 Petitioner is an immigration detainee proceeding with counsel with a petition for writ of 19 habeas corpus pursuant to

. Pending before the Court is Petitioner’s October 27, 20 2025, motion to proceed under pseudonym and for protective order. (Doc. 2.) 21 The Ninth Circuit has held that “a party may preserve his or her anonymity in judicial 22 proceedings in special circumstances when the party's need for anonymity outweighs prejudice to 23 the opposing party and the public's interest in knowing the party's identity.” Does I thru XXIII v. 24 Advanced Textile Corp.,

, 1068 (9th Cir. 2000). In determining the need for 25 anonymity, the Court must evaluate the following factors: 1) the severity of the threatened harm; 26 (2) the reasonableness of the anonymous party’s fears; (3) the anonymous party’s vulnerability to 27 such retaliation; (4) the precise prejudice at each stage of the proceedings to the opposing party 28 and whether proceedings may be structured so as to mitigate that prejudice; and (5) whether the 1 public’s interest in the case would be best served by requiring that the litigant reveals his or her 2 identity. Id. at 1068-69. 3 Petitioner is an El Salvadoran national who fears a high risk of torture and indefinite 4 incarceration should his identity and former gang membership become known to officials in El 5 Salvador or rival gang members inside and outside of El Salvadoran prisons. The current lawsuit 6 would reveal Petitioner’s identity, age, prior gang affiliation, and current and future locations. 7 Petitioner’s fears are credible and satisfy the first three factors. The Court does not find 8 Respondent will be prejudiced should Petitioner proceed under a pseudonym. As Petitioner notes, 9 Respondent has been informed of Petitioner’s identity. The Court finds Petitioner’s need for 10 anonymity outweighs the public’s interest in knowing his identity. 11 For the foregoing reasons, Petitioner’s motion to proceed under a pseudonym is 12 GRANTED. Further, Petitioner’s request for a protective order limiting revelation of all 13 identifying information is GRANTED. The parties shall redact or file under seal any identifying 14 information other than Petitioner’s first name and initials of his last name. The parties shall also 15 limit information relating to this case of Petitioner’s identity and related personal information 16 beyond what is reasonably necessary for this litigation and to comply with court orders. 17 IT IS SO ORDERED. 18

19 Dated: October 28, 2025 /s/ Sheila K. Oberto . UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE 20

21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28