On Tuesday, August 25th, 2026, a federal court in the Eleventh Circuit denied a plaintiff's request to proceed under a pseudonym in a lawsuit against Apple, Inc. The plaintiff alleges that a former paramour used an Apple AirTag to stalk her, raising concerns about privacy and safety.

The plaintiff sought anonymity due to the intimate nature of the case, which involves disclosures related to domestic violence and sexual harassment. She also expressed concern that revealing her identity could allow her alleged stalker to locate her and her minor child, posing a safety risk.

However, the court emphasized that defendants have the right to know the identity of their accusers to avoid embarrassment or fundamental unfairness. It noted that while a party may proceed anonymously by demonstrating a "substantial privacy right which outweighs the customary and constitutionally-embedded presumption of openness in judicial proceedings," courts have often denied anonymity in cases involving allegations of sexual assault, even when revealing the plaintiff's identity may cause personal embarrassment.

The decision contrasts with rulings from other circuits, such as the Third Circuit, where courts have allowed pseudonymity in similar cases. The court pointed out that those rulings are not binding or persuasive in the Eleventh Circuit. Additionally, it noted that several other alleged AirTag stalking victims have not proceeded anonymously, as seen in the docket of a failed class action against Apple.

This case underscores the ongoing division among U.S. courts regarding the law of pseudonymous litigation, especially in sensitive cases involving stalking and sexual assault allegations.

Sources