(PC) Cowen v. U.S. District Court ( 2022 )

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 9 FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA 10 11 DEJAN COWEN, No. 2:21-cv-01363-CKD P 12 Plaintiff, 13 v. ORDER 14 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT, 15 Defendant. 16 17 Plaintiff, a state prisoner proceeding pro se, has filed a civil rights action pursuant to 42 18 U.S.C. § 1983, together with a request to proceed in forma pauperis. The federal venue statute 19 provides that a civil action “may be brought in (1) a judicial district in which any defendant 20 resides, if all defendants are residents of the State in which the district is located, (2) a judicial 21 district in which a substantial part of the events or omissions giving rise to the claim occurred, or 22 a substantial part of property that is the subject of the action is situated, or (3) if there is no district 23 in which an action may otherwise be brought as provided in this action, any judicial district in 24 which any defendant is subject to the court’s personal jurisdiction with respect to such action.” 25 28 U.S.C. § 1391(b). 26 In this case, none of the defendants reside in this district. The claim arose at Salinas 27 Valley State Prison, which is in the Northern District of California. Therefore, plaintiff’s claim 28 should have been filed in the United States District Court for the Northern District of California. 1 | In the interest of justice, a federal court may transfer a complaint filed in the wrong district to the 2 || correct district. See 28 U.S.C. § 1406(a); Starnes v. McGuire, 512 F.2d 918, 932 (D.C. Cir. 3 || 1974). 4 Accordingly, IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that this matter is transferred to the United 5 || States District Court for the Northern District of California. 6 | Dated: January 18, 2022 Card Kt | La Ly (g— CAROLYNK. DELANEY SOS 8 UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE 9 10 1] 12 13 14 12/cowe1363.21.docx 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28