Firsov v. Frontier Airlines, Inc
- Susan Van Keulen
- 5:25-cv-02898
- U.S. District Court · Northern District of California
- 3
In Firsov v. Frontier Airlines, Judge Freeman denied Sergey Firsov’s motion to withdraw consent to magistrate-judge jurisdiction.
Sergey Firsov’s request to withdraw consent was denied, and the case was returned to Judge Susan Van Keulen for further proceedings; the order did not decide the underlying claims against Frontier Airlines, Inc.
What happened
In Firsov v. Frontier Airlines, Inc., Sergey Firsov, representing himself, asked to withdraw his consent to have a magistrate judge handle the civil case. His dispute concerns airline tickets, baggage, and a pet, but this order addressed only his request to change judicial jurisdiction.
The court said a party must show good cause or extraordinary circumstances to withdraw consent. It found that Firsov’s disagreement with the magistrate judge’s rulings about his filing-fee waiver application, payment of the filing fee, and request to keep that application sealed was not enough.
Judge Labson Freeman denied Firsov’s motion to withdraw consent and returned the case to Judge Susan Van Keulen for further proceedings.
The detailed version
- Firsov v. Frontier Airlines, Inc · No. 5:25-cv-02898
- Susan Van Keulen
- June 6, 2025
Background
Sergey Firsov, proceeding without a lawyer, sued Frontier Airlines, Inc. He alleged that he bought airline tickets, checked baggage and a pet in Warsaw, and later encountered problems involving baggage and the pet during travel. He also alleged that Frontier refused to provide a requested refund. The court noted that Firsov had filed 10 similar cases against other airlines since March 2025.
Firsov asked to proceed without paying the filing fee. The magistrate judge denied that request and required him to pay the $405 filing fee before a summons could issue. Firsov sought reconsideration, but the court denied that request and also denied his motion to disqualify the judge. He then moved to withdraw his consent to magistrate-judge jurisdiction and submitted an amended consent or declination form.
Legal standard
Under 28 U.S.C. § 636(c)(1), a magistrate judge may conduct all proceedings in a civil case when all parties consent. A party does not have an absolute right to withdraw that consent. Under Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 73(b)(3), a district judge may vacate the referral for good cause or when a party shows extraordinary circumstances.
Court’s reasoning
The court found that Firsov had not shown good cause or extraordinary circumstances. It characterized his request as based, at most, on disagreement with the magistrate judge’s decisions about his filing-fee waiver application and the requirement that he pay the filing fee before a summons could issue. The court said disagreement with a magistrate judge’s ruling is insufficient to withdraw consent.
The court also noted that Firsov had not filed a motion to seal his filing-fee waiver application under Civil Local Rule 79-5 or shown that the standards for sealing were met. It further found that the authorities cited in his motion did not support his arguments about the filing fee or sealing.
Disposition
The court DENIES Firsov’s motion to withdraw consent to magistrate-judge jurisdiction. It returns the case to Judge Susan Van Keulen for further proceedings. This order rules on the judicial-jurisdiction motion rather than the underlying allegations against Frontier.
Read the full 3-page opinion on CourtListener, the free public archive maintained by the Free Law Project.