Cases

Case: 23-1653 Document: 57 Page: 1 Filed: 03/03/2025 United States Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit ______________________ DOE NO. 1, Plaintiff-Appellee v. UNITED STATES, Defendant-Appellant ______________________ 2023-1653 ______________________ Appeal from the United

In the United States Court of Federal Claims No. 19-1747C (Filed: January 9, 2023) FOR PUBLICATION *************************************** DOE NO. 1, * * Plaintiff, * * v. *

In the United States Court of Federal Claims No. 19-1747C (Filed Under Seal: July 26, 2022) (Reissued: August 9, 2022) FOR PUBLICATION *************************************** DOE NO. 1, * * Plaintiff, * * v.

Chin, J. In 2012, plaintiff, Latrice Rubenstein, filed a claim with defendant Doe No. 1 (defendant), a public entity, alleging that from 1993 to 1994, when she was a high school student, her cross-country and track coach, who was defendant's employee, sexually molested her. When the claim was denied, she commenced the instant action against defendant and defendants Does Nos. 2-20.

In the United States Court of Federal Claims No. 19-1878 Filed: May 6, 2020 Reissued: May 22, 20201 ) DOE NO. 1, et al., ) ) Plaintiffs, ) Fair Labor Standards Act; Conditional

In the United States Court of Federal Claims No. 19-1749C (Filed: April 6, 2020) ) DOE NO.1, DOE NO. 2, ) Keywords: Conditional Certification; ) Proposed Notice; Class Action; FLSA; Plaintiffs, ) Overtime Pay; Federal Bureau of

In the United States Court of Federal Claims No. 19-1749C (Filed: February 5, 2020) ) DOE NO. 1, et al., ) Keywords: Protective Order; Anonymity; ) FLSA; Overtime Pay; Federal Bureau of Plaintiffs, ) Investigation; English Moni

Filed 11/1/17 IN THE SUPREME COURT OF CALIFORNIA LATRICE RUBENSTEIN, ) ) Plaintiff and Appellant, ) ) S234269 v. ) ) Ct.App. 4/1 D066722 DOE NO. 1 et al., ) ) I

Filed 6/1/22 CERTIFIED FOR PUBLICATION IN THE COURT OF APPEAL OF THE STATE OF CALIFORNIA SECOND APPELLATE DISTRICT DIVISION ONE JANE DOE NO. 1 et al., B310131 Plaintiffs and Appellants, (Los Angeles County Super. Ct. No. 19STCV11874) v. UBER TECHNOLOGIES, INC., et al., Defendants and Respondents. APPEAL from a judgment of the Supe

In the United States Court of Federal Claims No. 19-152C Filed: May 20, 2019 ) DOE NO. 1, et al, ) ) Plaintiffs, ) ) Conditional Certification Of Collective v.

BUDD, J. **376 Five students who attend public schools in the city of Boston filed a complaint in the Superior Court against the Secretary of Education, the chair and members of the board of secondary and elementary education, and the Commissioner of Education (commissioner), alleging that

IN THE SUPREME COURT OF THE STATE OF DELAWARE JOHN DOE NO. 1 and JOHN DOE NO. 2, No. 458, 2016 Plaintiffs Below, Appellants, Court BeloW_Chancery Court of the State of Delaware C.A. No. 10983 v. ROBERT M. COUPE, solely in his official capacity a Commissioner of the Delaware Department of Correction, Defendant Below, Appellee. &OQQOOQOOCOO¢OQOOOQO'JOO'>OOO¢OOQO¢COQOO’JCO'J Submitted: March 1, 2016 Decided: March 3, 2017 ORDER Before STRINE, Chief Justice; HOLLAND, VAL[HURA, VAUGH

Order entered April 30, 2020 In The Court of Appeals Fifth District of Texas at Dallas No. 05-19-00982-CV DONALD O. OZUMBA, M.D., OSSM ORTHOPEDICS, AND OSM HOLDINGS, LLC, Appellants V. JANE DOE NO. 6, Appellee On Appeal from the 380th Judicial District Court

Order entered November 19, 2019 In The Court of Appeals Fifth District of Texas at Dallas No. 05-19-00982-CV DONALD O. OZUMBA, M.D., ET AL., Appellants V. JANE DOE NO. 6, Appellee On Appeal from the 380th Judicial District Court

Order entered January 22, 2020 In The Court of Appeals Fifth District of Texas at Dallas No. 05-19-00982-CV DONALD O. OZUMBA, M.D., ET AL., Appellants V. JANE DOE NO. 6, Appellee On Appeal from the 380th Judicial District Court

Order entered December 11, 2019 In The Court of Appeals Fifth District of Texas at Dallas No. 05-19-00982-CV DONALD O. OZUMBA, M.D., ET AL., Appellants V. JANE DOE NO. 6, Appellee On Appeal from the 380th Judicial District Court

MEMORANDUM OPINION AND ORDER W. KEITH WATKINS, Chief Judge. Before the court is Plaintiffs’ motion to proceed under pseudonyms, (Doc. # 4), which has been fully briefed, (Docs. # 5, 29, and 30). A summary of the facts and legal questions at stake in this litigation can be found in the court’s recent memorandum opinion and order denying Defendants’ motion to dismiss. (See Doc. #49, at 3

Order entered October 1, 2019 In The Court of Appeals Fifth District of Texas at Dallas No. 05-19-00982-CV DONALD O. OZUMBA, M.D., ET AL., Appellants V. JANE DOE NO. 6, Appellee On Appeal from the 380th Judicial District Court

NO. 12-22-00026-CV IN THE COURT OF APPEALS TWELFTH COURT OF APPEALS DISTRICT TYLER, TEXAS MATT E. HIPKE M.D. AND MATT E. § APPEAL FROM THE 188TH HIPKE, M.D., PLLC D/B/A ADOLESCENT CARE TEAM, APPELLANTS V. JANE DOE NO. 1, AS PARENT AND NEXT FRIEND OF JOHN DOE NO. 1, A MINOR, JANE DOE NO. 2, AS PARENT AND NEXT FRIEND OF § JUDICIAL DISTRICT

McLEESE, J., concurring in part and dissenting in part: I agree that the trial court’s order denying attorney’s fees to Mr. Doe should be vacated. I write separately because my reasoning differs from the court’s reasoning in several significant respects. The court interprets, the District’s Anti-SLAPP Act as presumptively entitling a successful movant to an award of attorney’s fees, un