Court, Explained
U.S. Federal District Courts
Back to docket
N.D. Cal.Procedural orderFiled June 10, 2025

Ralon v. Kaiser Permanente Hospital

Judge
Joseph Spero
Docket
3:23-cv-03344
Court
U.S. District Court · Northern District of California
Pages
1
Civil Procedure
In one sentence

In Ralon v. Kaiser Foundation Health Plan, Judge Chen denied Ralon’s second motion to replace Magistrate Judge Spero.

Who this affects

Domitila Pelaez Ralon’s request to replace Magistrate Judge Spero.

What happened

Domitila Pelaez Ralon v. Kaiser Foundation Health Plan, Inc., et al. involved Ralon’s second request to replace Magistrate Judge Spero with a district judge.

Ralon had consented to a magistrate judge but asked the court to withdraw that consent and replace the magistrate judge. The opinion does not describe additional reasons for her request.

Judge Edward M. Chen denied the motion, ruling that Ralon had again failed to show good cause or extraordinary circumstances for withdrawing her consent.

The detailed version

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

Case
Ralon v. Kaiser Permanente Hospital · No. 3:23-cv-03344
Judge
Joseph Spero
Date
June 10, 2025

Background

The court considered Plaintiff Domitila Pelaez Ralon’s second motion to replace Magistrate Judge Spero with a district judge. The order states that Ralon had consented to proceed before a magistrate judge and sought to withdraw that consent.

Ruling

The court denied Ralon’s motion. It held that she had again failed to establish good cause or extraordinary circumstances sufficient to vacate her consent to a magistrate judge. The court cited Branch v. Umphenour, 936 F.3d 994, 1004–1005 (9th Cir. 2019).

The authoritative version

Read the full 1-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.