DOE v. WASHINGTON POST
| JOHN DOE |
| The Washington Post and WASHINGTON POST |
| 1:2019cv00477 |
| February 25, 2019 |
| US District Court for the District of Columbia |
| Assault Libel & Slander |
| 28 U.S.C. ยง 1332 |
| None |
Docket Report
RSS Track this Docket
This docket was last retrieved on March 7, 2019. A more recent docket listing may be available from PACER.
| Document Text |
|---|
| Case Assigned to Unassigned. (zmd) |
| Filing 4 NOTICE of Voluntary Dismissal by JOHN DOE (Moss, Bradley) |
Filing 3
MEMORANDUM & ORDER DENYING plaintiff's #2 Motion to Proceed Under a Pseudonym and to File Using Counsel's Address. See Memorandum & Order for further details. Signed by Chief Judge Beryl A. Howell on February 26, 2019. (lcbah4)
|
| NOTICE OF CORRECTED DOCKET ENTRY: re Case Assigned/Reassigned was assigned in error. Motion to proceed under pseudonym are assigned to Chief Judge Beryl A. Howell. (zef, ) |
| ENTERED IN ERROR.....Case Assigned to Judge Amy Berman Jackson. (zef, ) Modified on 2/26/2019 (zef, ). |
| Filing 2 Ex Parte MOTION for Leave to Proceed Under Pseudonym File Complaint Using a Pseudonym and Using Counsel's Address by JOHN DOE (Attachments: #1 Exhibit 1 - Moss Declaration, #2 Text of Proposed Order)(Moss, Bradley) Modified event on 3/7/2019 (znmw). |
| Filing 1 COMPLAINT against The Washington Post ( Filing fee $ 400 receipt number 0090-5965982) filed by JOHN DOE. (Attachments: #1 Civil Cover Sheet)(Moss, Bradley) |
Access additional case information on PACER
Use the links below to access additional information about this case on the US Court's PACER system. A subscription to PACER is required.
Access this case on the District Of Columbia District Court's Electronic Court Filings (ECF) System
- Search for Party Aliases
- Associated Cases
- Attorneys
- Case File Location
- Case Summary
- Docket Report
- History/Documents
- Parties
- Related Transactions
- Check Status
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.
