R. et al v. United Healthcare Insurance Company et al

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE DISTRICT OF UTAH
CENTRAL DIVISION
RYAN R. and S.R.,
Plaintiffs,
v.
UNITED HEALTHCARE INSURANCE
COMPANY; UNITED BEHAVIORAL
HEALTH; DYNAMIC CONSULTING LLC;
and GUIDELINE INC.,
Defendants.
MEMORANDUM DECISION AND
ORDER GRANTING PLAINTIFFS’
MOTION FOR LEAVE TO PROCEED
ANONYMOUSLY
(DOC. NO. 4)
Case No. 2:25-cv-01171
Magistrate Judge Daphne A. Oberg
S.R. and S.R.’s father, Ryan R., brought this action alleging Defendants violated
the Employee Retirement Income Security Act of 19741 (ERISA) by denying insurance
coverage for care S.R. received as a minor.2 Because Plaintiffs filed this case using
only initials and a partial name, the court ordered them to file either an amended
complaint under their full names or a motion for leave to proceed under initials.3
Plaintiffs filed a motion to proceed under initials.4 Because this case involves S.R.’s
highly sensitive and personal health information, Plaintiffs’ motion is granted. Any party
1 29 U.S.C. § 1001 et seq.
2 (See Compl., Doc. No. 1.)
3 (See Order to Show Cause, Doc. No. 2.)
4 (See Pls.’ Mot. for Leave to Proceed Anonymously, Doc. No. 4.)
Case 2:25-cv-01171-HCN-DAO Document 5 Filed 01/16/26 PageID.<pageID> Page
1 of 4

2
who objects to Plaintiffs proceeding under initials may file a motion to vacate this order
within seven days of the party’s appearance in this case.5
LEGAL STANDARDS
Under Rule 10 of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure, “[t]he title of the complaint
must name all the parties.”6 “Absent permission by the district court to proceed
anonymously, . . . the federal courts lack jurisdiction over the unnamed parties, as a
case has not been commenced with respect to them.”7 However, Rule 5.2 of the
Federal Rules of Civil Procedure provides that minors may be named using initials
unless the court orders otherwise.8 Additionally, a party may proceed anonymously in
“exceptional cases involving matters of a highly sensitive and personal nature, real
danger of physical harm, or where the injury litigated against would be incurred as a
result of the disclosure of the [party’s] identity.”9 In deciding whether to permit
anonymity, courts exercise discretion in weighing these privacy interests against the
public’s interest in access to legal proceedings.10
5 See DUCivR 10-2(d).
6 Fed. R. Civ. P. 10(a); see also Fed. R. Civ. P. 17(a) (requiring an action to “be
prosecuted in the name of the real party in interest”).
7 Nat’l Commodity & Barter Ass’n v. Gibbs, 886 F.2d 1240, 1245 (10th Cir. 1989).
8 Fed. R. Civ. P. 5.2(a)(3).
9 Femedeer v. Haun, 227 F.3d 1244, 1246 (10th Cir. 2000) (quoting Doe v. Frank, 951
F.2d 320, 324 (11th Cir. 1992)).
10 See id.
Case 2:25-cv-01171-HCN-DAO Document 5 Filed 01/16/26 PageID.<pageID> Page
2 of 4

3
ANALYSIS
Where this case involves highly sensitive and personal health information, and
Defendants do not oppose Plaintiffs’ motion, the motion is granted. Plaintiffs’ complaint
contains sensitive details about S.R.’s personal circumstances and the serious mental
health issues S.R. confronted as a minor.11 Because this information is “of a highly
sensitive and personal nature,” S.R. has a strong interest in the protection of S.R.’s
identity.12 Although S.R. is now an adult, this case relates to care S.R. received as a
child.13 Additionally, Ryan R.’s anonymity is warranted where disclosure of his full
name would reveal S.R.’s identity.14
Further, public interest in the identities of the parties in this proceeding appears
limited. This case does not involve the sorts of important public issues giving rise to
common interest—such as cases “attacking the constitutionality of popularly enacted
legislation.”15 Instead, this case involves private individuals challenging the denial of
11 (See generally Compl., Doc. No. 1.)
12 Femedeer, 227 F.3d at 1246 (quoting Frank, 951 F.2d at 324).
13 See Tony M. v. United Healthcare Ins., No. 2:19-cv-00165, 2025 U.S. Dist. LEXIS
18132, at *4 (D. Utah Jan. 31, 2025) (unpublished) (permitting ERISA plaintiff to
proceed pseudonymously where the case related to medical care the plaintiff received
as a minor); Doe v. USD No. 237, No. 16-cv-2801, 2017 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 142435, at
*31 (D. Kan. Sept. 1, 2017) (unpublished) (“The fact that Doe was a minor at all times
material to the allegations of the complaint is at the forefront of the Court’s analysis [of
whether the plaintiff could proceed pseudonymously].”).
14 See S.E.S. v. Galena Unified Sch. Dist. No. 499, No. 18-2042, 2018 U.S. Dist. LEXIS
116054, at *4 (D. Kan. July 12, 2018) (unpublished) (noting a child “and his parents
share common privacy interests based on their inseparable relationship,” because
disclosure of a parent’s identity would effectively disclose the child’s identity).
15 See Femedeer, 227 F.3d at 1246.
Case 2:25-cv-01171-HCN-DAO Document 5 Filed 01/16/26 PageID.<pageID> Page
3 of 4

4
insurance benefits for care received by a minor. Any public interest in this case is
limited (at least at this time) to the precedential or persuasive value of the rulings in the
case. The use of pseudonyms does not diminish this value.
CONCLUSION
Where this case implicates matters of a highly sensitive and personal nature
regarding care received by a minor, the motion16 is granted. Plaintiffs may proceed
pseudonymously in this action. Within seven days of this order, Plaintiffs shall file,
under seal: a notice containing the full legal names of Ryan R. and S.R.17 That filing
shall remain under seal unless otherwise ordered. Plaintiffs shall also provide this
notice to Defendant. Any party who objects to Plaintiffs proceeding under initials may
file a motion to vacate this order within seven days of the party’s appearance in this
case.18
DATED this 16th day of January, 2026.
BY THE COURT:
_____________________________
Daphne A. Oberg
United States Magistrate Judge
16 (Doc. No. 4.)
17 See DUCivR 10-2(a)(1)(B); see also W.N.J. v. Yocom, 257 F.3d 1171, 1172 (10th
Cir. 2001) (“If a court grants permission [to proceed pseudonymously], it is often with
the requirement that the real names of the plaintiffs be disclosed to the defense and the
court but kept under seal thereafter.” (citing Nat’l Commodity & Barter Ass’n, 886 F.2d
at 1245)).
18 See DUCivR 10-2(d).
Case 2:25-cv-01171-HCN-DAO Document 5 Filed 01/16/26 PageID.<pageID> Page
4 of 4