(PC) Hill v. Bright ( 2020 )

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 9 FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA 10 11 CYMEYON HILL, No. 2:20-cv-0713 CKD P 12 Plaintiff, 13 v. ORDER 14 NARREN BRIGHT, et al., 15 Defendants. 16 17 Plaintiff, a state prisoner proceeding pro se, has filed a civil rights action pursuant to 42 18 U.S.C. § 1983 The federal venue statute provides that a civil action “may be brought in (1) a 19 judicial district in which any defendant resides, if all defendants are residents of the State in 20 which the district is located, (2) a judicial district in which a substantial part of the events or 21 omissions giving rise to the claim occurred, or a substantial part of property that is the subject of 22 the action is situated, or (3) if there is no district in which an action may otherwise be brought as 23 provided in this action, any judicial district in which any defendant is subject to the court’s 24 personal jurisdiction with respect to such action.” 28 U.S.C. § 1391(b). 25 In this case, the claim arose in Monterey County, which is in the Northern District of 26 California. Therefore, plaintiff’s claim should have been filed in the United States District Court 27 for the Northern District of California. In the interest of justice, a federal court may transfer a 28 ///// 1 | complaint filed in the wrong district to the correct district. See 28 U.S.C. § 1406(a); Starnes v. 2 | McGuire, 512 F.2d 918, 932 (D.C. Cir. 1974). 3 Accordingly, IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that this matter is transferred to the United 4 | States District Court for the Northern District of California. 5 | Dated: April 9, 2020 / /, CAN fu fl. ay 6 CAROLYN K. DELANEY 7 UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE 8 9 10 | 1h hill0713.21 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28