Court, Explained
U.S. Federal District Courts
Back to docket
N.D. Cal.Procedural orderFiled Dec. 18, 2023

Gaines v. Zhou

Judge
Robert Illman
Docket
1:23-cv-06561
Court
U.S. District Court · Northern District of California
Pages
2
Civil ProcedurePro Se
In one sentence

In Jacobi Julius Gaines v. Y. ZHOV, Judge Claire transferred the civil-rights case to California’s Northern District because the claim arose in Alameda County.

Who this affects

Jacobi Julius Gaines and the defendants are affected because the case was transferred from the Eastern District of California to the Northern District of California; the order does not decide the civil-rights claims.

What happened

Jacobi Julius Gaines v. Y. ZHOV, et al. is a civil-rights case brought by Gaines, who was proceeding without a lawyer and identified himself as a county inmate. He filed under a federal civil-rights law and requested permission to proceed without paying the filing fee.

The court said the claim arose in Alameda County, which is in the Northern District of California. Because the case was filed in the wrong federal district, the court determined that it should have been filed in the Northern District of California.

Judge Allison Claire ordered the case transferred to the U.S. District Court for the Northern District of California. The order did not decide the underlying civil-rights claims.

The detailed version

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

Case
Gaines v. Zhou · No. 1:23-cv-06561
Judge
Robert Illman
Date
Dec. 18, 2023

Background

Jacobi Julius Gaines, identified in the order as a county inmate proceeding without a lawyer, filed a civil-rights action under 42 U.S.C. § 1983. He also filed an application to proceed without paying the filing fee under 28 U.S.C. § 1915.

Venue analysis

The court applied the federal venue statute, 28 U.S.C. § 1391(b). That statute generally permits a civil action to be filed where a defendant resides, where a substantial part of the events or omissions occurred, or, in limited circumstances, where a defendant is subject to the court’s personal jurisdiction.

The court stated that Gaines’s claim arose in Alameda County. Because Alameda County is in the Northern District of California, the court concluded that the action should have been filed there rather than in the Eastern District of California.

Disposition

The court stated that, in the interest of justice, a federal court may transfer a complaint filed in the wrong district to the correct district under 28 U.S.C. § 1406(a). Judge Allison Claire ordered that the matter be transferred to the United States District Court for the Northern District of California. The order did not resolve the merits of the civil-rights claims.

Note on the record

The supplied metadata identifies a different court, judge, date, and spelling of the defendant’s name than the opinion text. This summary follows the opinion text, which identifies the court as the Eastern District of California, the defendant as “Y. ZHOV, et al.,” the judge as Allison Claire, and the date as December 15, 2023.

The authoritative version

Read the full 2-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.