Allison Claire
How Judge Claire decides
Patterns drawn from this judge's own signed orders. Every observation links to the order it came from.
What persuades
On prisoner civil-rights claims, recommends dismissal without prejudice for failure to exhaust administrative remedies before filing.
“Defendants' March 9, 2012 motion to dismiss be granted in part; ... Plaintiff's complaint be dismissed without prejudice for failure to exhaust administrative remedies”
Procedural preferences
In habeas petitions, recommends dismissal for lack of habeas jurisdiction where expunging the challenged record would only speculatively affect the duration of custody (so the claim sounds in section 1983) or where the claim is moot.
“Respondent's motion to dismiss this petition (ECF No. 19) be granted, and the petition be dismissed”
On removed unlawful-detainer and foreclosure actions, recommends remand where the complaint states only state-law claims — a federal defense cannot support removal.
“Plaintiff's motion to remand be granted; and ... This action be remanded to the Sacramento County Superior Court.”
Cautions
In Social Security appeals, recommends affirming where the claimant identifies no specific legal error and substantial evidence supports the ALJ's decision.
“Plaintiff's motion for summary judgment (ECF No. 10) be DENIED; ... The Commissioner's cross-motion for summary judgment (ECF No. 13) be GRANTED”
Signed rulings
A grounded sample of orders signed by this judge, with the verbatim dispositive language.
“Respondent's motion to dismiss this petition (ECF No. 19) be granted, and the petition be dismissed”
“Defendants' motion to dismiss, filed on March 7, 2012 (Doc. No. 13), be denied”
“Plaintiff's motion to remand be granted; and ... This action be remanded to the Sacramento County Superior Court.”
“Defendants' March 9, 2012 motion to dismiss be granted in part; ... Plaintiff's complaint be dismissed without prejudice for failure to exhaust administrative remedies”
“Plaintiff's March 12, 2012 motion for preliminary injunctive relief be denied.”
“Defendants' January 2, 2013 motion to dismiss be granted; Plaintiff's federal claims be dismissed without leave to amend; Plaintiff's state law claims be dismissed without prejudice to renewal in state court.”
“Respondent's motion to dismiss (ECF No. 13) be granted on the alternate grounds that the petition is moot and that it does not come within this court's habeas corpus jurisdiction”
“Plaintiff's August 29, 2012 motion to dismiss and/or strike be granted in part. ... The motion should be granted in all other respects.”
“Plaintiff's motion for summary judgment (ECF No. 10) be DENIED; ... The Commissioner's cross-motion for summary judgment (ECF No. 13) be GRANTED”
“The undersigned recommends that defendant’s motion to dismiss (ECF No. 19) be GRANTED and that plaintiff’s claims of age discrimination, disability discrimination, and whistleblower retaliation be dismissed without leave to amend.”
“the undersigned recommends that defendant’s motion to dismiss (ECF No. 21) be GRANTED, and that plaintiff be granted LEAVE TO AMEND as to his Title VII hostile work environment claim only.”
“Plaintiff’s motion for summary judgment (ECF No. 11) is GRANTED; 2. The Commissioner’s cross-motion for summary judgment (ECF No. 14) is DENIED; 3. This matter is REMANDED to the Commissioner for further consideration consistent with this order”
Sua sponte findings and recommendations in a Section 2254 habeas matter recommending dismissal without prejudice for failure to prosecute and failure to comply with a court order, after the court's IFP order was repeatedly returned as undeliverable and the petitioner never updated his address of record. No party motion was before the court. Verbatim recommendation: 'IT IS HEREBY RECOMMENDED that this action be dismissed for without prejudice for failure to prosecute, see L.R. 183(b), and failure to comply with this court’s order, see L.R. 110.' Signer identity confirmed by the -AC caption, the magistrate-judge findings-and-recommendations format, and the record's own filing text stating the order was signed by Magistrate Judge Allison Claire on 2/13/2025.
Caseload & timing
From public federal docket records for this judge.
Allison Claire is the consent (636(c)) assigned magistrate judge on a Sacramento docket dominated by Social Security appeals; she is the judge who enters the final consent judgment. Many of these dockets were opened and screened by predecessor magistrate judges before reassignment to her. Her broader docket also carries referred prisoner civil-rights (42 U.S.C. 1983), state habeas (28 U.S.C. 2254), and removed civil and mortgage matters.
Put Judge Claire's record to work
Ezel drafts and answers grounded in this exact profile: how Judge Claire actually rules, not a generic AI guess.
Opens in Ezel Pro. Every answer is grounded in Judge Claire's own signed orders and cites them.