Firsov v. United Airlines, Inc
- Beth Freeman
- 5:25-cv-03784
- U.S. District Court · Northern District of California
- 3
In Firsov v. United Airlines, Judge Freeman denied Sergey Firsov’s motion to withdraw consent to magistrate-judge jurisdiction.
Sergey Firsov’s request to withdraw consent was denied, so the case remained referred to Judge van Keulen for further proceedings. The order did not decide the underlying claims about the airline tickets.
What happened
In Firsov v. United Airlines, Sergey Firsov sued United Airlines and Lufthansa Airlines after he said a payment for a United ticket failed and he later bought other tickets for more money. He had consented to have a magistrate judge handle the case.
Firsov asked to withdraw that consent, arguing that his income and expenses should be sealed and that a summons should be issued. The court said he had not shown the required good reason or unusual circumstances. It explained that disagreement with the magistrate judge’s decisions—including denying his fee-waiver request and requiring payment before issuing a summons—was not enough.
Judge Beth Labson Freeman denied the motion and returned the case to Judge van Keulen for further proceedings.
The detailed version
- Firsov v. United Airlines, Inc · No. 5:25-cv-03784
- Beth Freeman
- July 2, 2025
Background
Sergey Firsov, representing himself, sued United Airlines, Inc. and Lufthansa Airlines. He alleged that on February 7, 2025, he tried to buy a round-trip ticket through United’s website for $789, but the payment failed. He later contacted Lufthansa about the same trip and was quoted a $3,000 fare. He alleged that he then bought four separate tickets for “much more.”
Firsov filed a request to proceed without paying the filing fee and consented to a magistrate judge handling all proceedings. The court denied his fee-waiver request because he had not shown that he could not pay the filing fee, and it later denied his request for reconsideration. The court also denied his motion to disqualify the judge. Firsov then moved to withdraw his consent to magistrate-judge jurisdiction.
Legal standard
A magistrate judge may conduct all proceedings in a civil case when all parties consent. Under the cited federal law and procedural rule, consent may be withdrawn only when the required good cause or extraordinary circumstances are shown. The district judge decides whether to vacate the referral.
Court’s analysis
Firsov argued that his income and expenses should be kept under seal and that a summons should be issued. The court concluded that he had not shown good cause or extraordinary circumstances supporting withdrawal of consent. The court viewed his request as based mainly on disagreement with the denial of his fee-waiver application and the order requiring him to pay the filing fee before a summons could issue. The court stated that this disagreement was insufficient.
The court also explained that Firsov had not filed a motion to seal his fee-waiver application under the applicable local rule or shown that the standards for sealing were met. It therefore rejected his argument that the magistrate judge had improperly violated his privacy by not sealing his income and expenses.
Disposition
The court denied Firsov’s motion to withdraw consent to magistrate-judge jurisdiction. It returned the case to Judge van Keulen for further proceedings.
Read the full 3-page opinion on CourtListener, the free public archive maintained by the Free Law Project.