Court, Explained
U.S. Federal District Courts
←Back to docket
N.D. Cal.Procedural orderFiled Jan. 24, 2025

Kern v. Arriero-Goff

Judge
Charles Breyer
Docket
3:25-cv-00953
Court
U.S. District Court · Northern District of California
Pages
2
Civil ProcedurePro Se
In one sentence

In Kern v. Arriero-Goff, Judge Kim transferred a prisoner’s civil-rights case to the Northern District of California because venue was improper.

Who this affects

James Curtis Kern’s case was transferred from the Eastern District of California to the Northern District of California; the order did not decide the underlying claim against Sara Arriero-Goff.

What happened

In Kern v. Arriero-Goff, James Curtis Kern, a state prisoner representing himself, filed a civil-rights case against Sara Arriero-Goff and asked to proceed without paying the filing fee.

The court said the claim arose in Del Norte County, which is in the Northern District of California. Because the case was filed in the wrong federal district, the court determined that it should have been filed there.

Judge Chi Soo Kim ordered the matter transferred to the United States District Court for the Northern District of California. The order did not decide the underlying civil-rights claim.

The detailed version

For law students, journalists, and other readers who want the full reasoning

Case
Kern v. Arriero-Goff · No. 3:25-cv-00953
Judge
Charles Breyer
Date
Jan. 24, 2025

Background

James Curtis Kern, a state prisoner proceeding without a lawyer, filed a civil-rights action under 42 U.S.C. § 1983 against Sara Arriero-Goff. He also applied to proceed without paying the filing fee under 28 U.S.C. § 1915.

Venue

The court applied the federal venue statute, 28 U.S.C. § 1391(b). That statute identifies the federal districts where a civil case may be filed, including a district where a substantial part of the events giving rise to the claim occurred. The court stated that Kern’s claim arose in Del Norte County, which is in the Northern District of California.

Ruling

The court concluded that the case should have been filed in the Northern District of California rather than the Eastern District of California. Citing 28 U.S.C. § 1406(a), which permits transfer of a case filed in the wrong district when doing so serves the interests of justice, Judge Chi Soo Kim ordered that the matter be transferred to the United States District Court for the Northern District of California. The order did not reach the merits of the civil-rights claim.

The authoritative version

Read the full 2-page opinion on CourtListener, the free public archive maintained by the Free Law Project.

Open opinion PDF →
Summary written with AI assistance. See how summaries are made. Spot something wrong? Tell us.