Lai v. City of Oakland
- Joseph Spero
- 3:25-cv-06780
- U.S. District Court · Northern District of California
- 1
In Lai v. City of Oakland, Judge Spero denied Lai’s request for a court-appointed interpreter but allowed a Mandarin-English-speaking person to assist him.
Guangnan Lai, whose request for a court-appointed interpreter was denied, but who may appear with a Mandarin-English-speaking person for language assistance.
What happened
In Lai v. City of Oakland, Guangnan Lai asked the court to appoint an interpreter for hearings and other proceedings in his civil case against the City of Oakland and other defendants.
The court explained that the Court Interpreters Act applies only to proceedings brought by the United States. Because Lai, a private individual, brought this case and the United States was not involved, the Act did not authorize a court-appointed interpreter.
Judge Joseph C. Spero denied the request for appointment of an interpreter. The court said Lai may appear with someone fluent in Mandarin and English to provide language assistance, even if that person is not formally certified as an interpreter.
The detailed version
- Lai v. City of Oakland · No. 3:25-cv-06780
- Joseph Spero
- Sept. 25, 2025
Background
Guangnan Lai requested that the court appoint an interpreter to assist him during hearings and other proceedings in this civil action. He relied on the Court Interpreters Act, 28 U.S.C. § 1827.
Court’s reasoning
The court held that the Act entitles litigants to an interpreter only in proceedings “instituted by the United States.” This case was brought by a private individual and did not involve the United States. Relying on the Act’s text and a cited Ninth Circuit decision, the court concluded that § 1827 did not authorize appointing an interpreter for Lai in this action.
Ruling
Judge Joseph C. Spero denied the request for appointment of an interpreter. The court stated that Lai may appear at proceedings with an individual who is fluent in Mandarin and English to provide language assistance, whether or not that individual is formally certified as an interpreter.
Read the full 1-page opinion on CourtListener, the free public archive maintained by the Free Law Project.