Jimenez v. Rise Boro
- Laura Swain
- 1:25-cv-03782
- U.S. District Court · Southern District of New York
- 4
In Jimenez v. Rise Boro, Judge Swain transferred Jimenez’s employment-discrimination case to the Eastern District of New York.
Socorro Jimenez’s employment-discrimination, § 1981, and state-law claims were transferred from the Southern District of New York to the Eastern District of New York. Rise Boro Community Partnership will defend the case in the transferee court.
What happened
Socorro Jimenez filed Jimenez v. Rise Boro Community Partnership without a lawyer, alleging employment discrimination under Title VII and claims under federal and state law. She sued her former employer, which the opinion says is located in Brooklyn.
The Southern District of New York said the case could properly be heard there, but the events and employer were in Kings County, which is in the Eastern District of New York. The court therefore found that the Eastern District would be more convenient for the parties, witnesses, and evidence.
The court transferred the action to the Eastern District of New York under federal transfer law, and the case was closed in the Southern District. Judge Laura Taylor Swain also denied permission to appeal without prepaying fees; the transferee court will decide whether Jimenez may continue without prepaying fees.
The detailed version
- Jimenez v. Rise Boro · No. 1:25-cv-03782
- Laura Swain
- July 25, 2025
Background
Socorro Jimenez filed this action without a lawyer against her former employer, Rise Boro Community Partnership. She asserted employment-discrimination claims under Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964. The court also treated her complaint as asserting claims under 42 U.S.C. § 1981 and state law.
The opinion states that Jimenez and Rise Boro are connected to Brooklyn, and that the events underlying the claims occurred in Kings County. Kings County is within the Eastern District of New York, while the case was filed in the Southern District of New York.
Venue and transfer
The court explained that the Southern District was a proper venue for the Title VII claims because the alleged employment practices occurred in New York State. The Eastern District was also a proper venue for the § 1981 and state-law claims because a substantial part of the events occurred in Kings County.
Under 28 U.S.C. § 1404(a), a court may transfer a case—even when venue is proper—to another federal district where the case could have been brought if the transfer would serve the convenience of the parties and witnesses and the interests of justice. The court considered the location of the events, the defendant, and expected relevant documents and witnesses. It concluded that the Eastern District appeared to be the more convenient forum.
Disposition
The court transferred the action to the United States District Court for the Eastern District of New York. The Clerk was directed to carry out the transfer, and the order states that the case was closed in the Southern District of New York. The transferee court—not the Southern District—will decide whether Jimenez may proceed without prepaying filing fees. The Southern District also ruled that an appeal from the order would not be taken in good faith and denied permission to appeal without prepaying fees. The order did not decide whether Jimenez’s discrimination, § 1981, or state-law claims have merit.
Read the full 4-page opinion on CourtListener, the free public archive maintained by the Free Law Project.