Another financial-sector company is fighting to keep its namesecret as it challenges the power of the Consumer Financial Protection Bureau to bringan enforcement action.

The company—identified only as “John Doe” in Washington federaltrial court—offers pension advance products that allow consumers toreceive a lump sum payment in exchange for a portion, or all, oftheir future pension.

Related: CFPB warns of 3 pension advance traps toavoid

The CFPB has warned that such products can “eatinto your retirement income.” State regulators in New York andCalifornia, among other states, have taken actions in recent yearsagainst practices in the pension-advance market.

Companies have tangled with federal agencies, with limitedsuccess, over the right to remain anonymous in challenges toinvestigative and enforcement authority.

The latest John Doe company in the Washington case, which suedthe consumer bureau in January, argued the agency should not beable to identify it as the target of an investigation. Publicationof the company’s name—as it tries to stop any enforcementaction—would bring “irreparable harm,” the company’s lawyersargued.

Related: CFPB urges more financial wellnesseducation

U.S. District Judge Rudolph Contreras on Friday blocked the CFPB from revealing the name of thecompany for at least the next two weeks. But the judge refused towholesale stop the bureau from pursuing any enforcement action atall.

The company’s lawyers at Womble Carlyle Sandridge & Rice andDorsey & Whitney immediately went to the U.S. Court of Appealsfor the D.C. Circuit to try to stop the agency from movingforward.

In 2015, a credit-repair company and four firms convinced ajudge to keep their identities hidden. Because of anapparent clerical error, Prime Marketing Holdings LLC, aCalifornia-based credit repair company, was eventually revealed asone of the companies that brought the lawsuit. By then, the CFPBhad sued Prime Marketing in Los Angeles federal district court.

In the latest case in Washington, the John Doecompany challenged the CFPB’s practice of posting documentsrelated to appeals of the agency’s subpoenas, called "civilinvestigative demands." The John Doe company lost its appeal,freeing up the CFPB to post documents online about the dispute.

The company argued in its lawsuit that the disclosure of theCFPB’s probe would cause irreparable harm to its “business andaccumulated goodwill.” Beyond its concern with public perception,the company’s lawyers argued the CFPB should not be permitted tobring an enforcement action at all as the lawfulness of theagency’s structure is being challenged in an unrelated courtcase.

The company has joined a long line of CFPB targets that haveseized upon a divided D.C. Circuit panel decision that struck downthe agency's structure as unconstitutional. The opinion said thepresident should be able to remove the CFPB at will, rather thanhaving to find cause. The full D.C. Circuit agreed Thursday to review thepanel decision. Arguments are scheduled for May 24.

In its lawsuit last month, the company argued that the CFPBshould not be able to take any action against it “until theseparation of powers violation identified by the D.C. Circuit hasbeen remedied.” Womble Carlyle’s Chris Jones argued in court Fridaythat the D.C. Circuit’s 100-page decision was “flat-outpersuasive.”

“We want the agency to push the pause button until this cloud ofunconstitutionality clears,” Jones said.