What are the exact dates and jurisdictions of Katie Johnson’s filings against Donald Trump?
Executive summary
Katie Johnson — a pseudonym used by a plaintiff who alleged sexual assault involving Jeffrey Epstein and Donald Trump — filed a complaint in 2016 that shows filings in at least two federal jurisdictions: an initial California filing in spring 2016 and a refiled action in New York later that year; reporting and archive sites say the case was dropped/dismissed in November 2016 (dates vary slightly by source) [1] [2] [3].
1. What the records and reporting say about where the suit was filed
Contemporaneous summaries and later explainers report that the anonymous plaintiff using the name “Katie Johnson” first filed a lawsuit in California in 2016 and then refiled in New York; court docket aggregators show a federal case listed as Katie Johnson v. Donald J. Trump with the Central District of California case number 5:16-cv-00797, indicating proceedings or docket entries tied to that C.D. Cal. filing [2] [3]. Wikipedia’s compilation of allegations likewise notes an April 2016 California filing that was dismissed the following month, which aligns with the timeline most secondary sources provide [1].
2. Exact dates reported for filings and dismissal — what sources provide
Multiple secondary sources converge on the basic 2016 timetable: an April 2016 filing in California, a reported refiling in October 2016, and the suit being dropped or dismissed in November 2016 [2] [1]. CourtListener’s docket page for Katie Johnson v. Donald J. Trump (5:16-cv-00797) is an archival record tied to the case and shows docket activity; the docket entry page itself is stamped with a “Last Updated” note in 2025 but lists the underlying 2016 filings [3]. Note: these sources report month-level timing rather than a single uniform day for each action; they differ slightly on the specific refiling or dismissal date language [2] [1].
3. Who the defendants were in the filings and how the plaintiff was identified
Reporting and summaries state the complaint named both Jeffrey Epstein and Donald J. Trump as defendants; the plaintiff used the pseudonym “Katie Johnson” (sometimes referenced as “Jane Doe” in later summaries), which these sources say was used to protect the plaintiff’s identity in initial filings [2] [4]. The CourtListener docket summary lists a COMPLAINT naming Epstein and Trump, and it records administrative details such as assignment to a judge and discovery referral [3].
4. How and why the case ended, according to coverage
Multiple explainers state the lawsuit was dropped or dismissed in November 2016, and that the plaintiff’s attorney cited threats or safety concerns as a factor in the plaintiff’s withdrawal from public participation; the case did not proceed to trial and did not produce a public settlement reported by major outlets as of the dates covered in these sources [2] [4] [1]. Some outlets treating later resurgences of the story characterize the case as “dropped,” while archive records reflect the short-lived nature of the litigation [2] [3].
5. Disagreements, limitations, and areas not documented in these sources
Sources disagree on or do not consistently provide a single calendar day for each filing and the precise mechanics of the refiling; some accounts say “April 2016” for the initial California complaint, others cite a June or October 2016 refiling before a November 2016 dismissal, and the docket aggregator lists the Central District of California case number without reproducing every filing-date line item in the short summaries provided here [2] [1] [3]. Available sources do not mention explicit day-by-day docket entries here for each filing, nor do they provide verified text of every complaint page in the excerpts given [3] [2].
6. Misinfo that has circulated and what reporting says about it
Several fact‑checking and legal explainers warn that social posts alleging recent settlements, large payments in 2024–2025, or revived active litigation are false: these summaries state there were no new legal developments or verified settlements in 2024–2025 and that claims of a 2025 settlement (figures and case numbers cited in social posts) do not match the historical Katie Johnson docket [2] [4]. In short, the reliable published accounts in our set say the 2016 action ended without a public trial or confirmed settlement and that later claims of revived, settled, or newly active litigation are not supported by the cited case records here [2].
7. Bottom line for someone seeking “exact dates and jurisdictions”
Based on available reporting and the docket snapshot: jurisdictionally, the matter is tied to a 2016 federal filing in California (C.D. Cal. case 5:16‑cv‑00797) with reporting of a refiling in New York in 2016; temporally, sources give April–June 2016 for initial filings, an October 2016 refiling in some accounts, and a November 2016 drop/dismissal — but no single source in this set supplies a complete, day‑by‑day docket log for every step [3] [2] [1]. If you want the exact calendar-day stamps for each filing, the CourtListener docket entry (5:16-cv-00797) is the closest primary archival lead cited here and would be the next document to pull for day-level verification [3].