(PC) Jones v. Cortez ( 2019 )

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 9 EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA 10 11 WILLIAM J. JONES, Case No. 1:19-cv-01484-JDP 12 Plaintiff, ORDER TRANSFERRING CASE TO THE 13 v. SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA 14 V. CORTEZ, et al., 15 Defendant. 16 17 Plaintiff is a state prisoner proceeding without counsel in this civil rights action pursuant 18 to 42 U.S.C. § 1983. 19 The federal venue statute requires that a civil action, other than one based on diversity 20 jurisdiction, be brought only in: 21 (1) a judicial district where any defendant resides, if all defendants are residents of the State in which the district is located, (2) a 22 judicial district in which a substantial part of the events or omissions giving rise to the claim occurred, or a substantial part of 23 the property that is the subject of the action is situated, or (3) if there is no district in which an action may otherwise be brought as 24 provided in this section, any judicial district in which any defendant is subject to the court’s personal jurisdiction with 25 respect to such action. 26 27 28 U.S.C. § 1391(b). In this case, none of the defendants reside in this district. The claim arose 28 1 | in Imperial County, which is in the Southern District of California. Therefore, plaintiffs claim 2 | should have been filed in the United States District Court for the Southern District of California. 3 | In the interest of justice, a federal court may transfer a complaint filed in the wrong district to the 4 | correct district. See 28 U.S.C. § 1406(a); Starnes v. McGuire, 512 F.2d 918, 932 (D.C. Cir. 5 | 1974). Accordingly, I order that this matter be transferred to the United States District Court for 6 | the Southern District of California. 4 8 IT IS SO ORDERED. ° : pp senn Reon _ Dated: _ November 7, 2019 10 UNI STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE 11 12 13 No. 205. 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 >