Court, Explained
U.S. Federal District Courts
Back to docket
N.D. Cal.Procedural orderFiled Feb. 12, 2024

Demos v. Trump

Judge
Thomas Hixson
Docket
3:24-cv-00186
Court
U.S. District Court · Northern District of California
Pages
2
Civil ProcedurePro Se
In one sentence

In Demos v. Trump, Judge Hixson transferred the case to Florida because venue was improper in California.

Who this affects

John Robert Demos’s lawsuit against Donald John Trump was transferred from the Northern District of California to the Southern District of Florida; the court did not decide the claims’ merits.

What happened

In Demos v. Trump, John Robert Demos filed a civil-rights lawsuit without a lawyer against Donald John Trump, alleging that Trump supported the January 6, 2021 riots and engaged in insurrection, rebellion, and treason.

The court said neither party resided in the Northern District of California and that the relevant events occurred in Washington, D.C. It concluded that venue was proper in either the Southern District of Florida, where Trump resides, or the District of Columbia.

Magistrate Judge Thomas S. Hixson ordered the case transferred to the U.S. District Court for the Southern District of Florida under the federal venue statute. The order did not address the merits of Demos’s claims, and the clerk was directed to close the California case.

The detailed version

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

Case
Demos v. Trump · No. 3:24-cv-00186
Judge
Thomas Hixson
Date
Feb. 12, 2024

Background

John Robert Demos filed a civil-rights action without a lawyer under 42 U.S.C. § 1983. He is incarcerated in Stafford Creek Corrections Center in Aberdeen, Washington. He sued former United States president Donald John Trump, alleging that Trump engaged in insurrection, rebellion, and treason on January 6, 2021, by actively supporting riots in Washington, D.C. The opinion states that Demos listed Trump’s residence as Mar-a-Lago, Florida.

Venue analysis

The court applied 28 U.S.C. § 1391(b), which provides that venue is proper either where a defendant resides or where a substantial part of the events or omissions giving rise to the claim occurred. The court found that neither party resided in the Northern District of California and that the relevant events did not occur there. It determined that Trump resides in Palm Beach County, in the Southern District of Florida, and that the events took place in Washington, D.C., in the District of Columbia. Venue therefore properly lay in either of those districts.

The court also noted that Demos referred to the riots as occurring in 2020 and 2023 in parts of his filing. It presumed those references were typographical errors referring to the January 6, 2021 attack on the United States Capitol.

Ruling

The court exercised its discretion to transfer the action to the district where Trump resides. Under 28 U.S.C. § 1406(a), the court ordered the action transferred to the United States District Court for the Southern District of Florida and directed the clerk to close the Northern District of California case.

The court expressly stated that the transfer was non-dispositive: it did not address the merits of the claims, dispose of any claims or defenses, foreclose the relief sought, or terminate the case within the federal court system. The action was transferred to another federal district court rather than dismissed.

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.