(PC) Sheldon v. San Quentin Staff ( 2023 )

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 9 EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA 10 11 JEFFREY THEODORE SHELDON, 1:23-cv-01052-GSA (PC) 12 Plaintiff, ORDER TRANSFERRING CASE TO THE 13 v. NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA 14 SAN QUENTIN STAFF, et al., 15 Defendant. 16 17 18 19 Plaintiff, a state prisoner proceeding pro se, has filed a civil rights action pursuant to 42 20 U.S.C. § 1983. 21 The federal venue statute requires that a civil action, other than one based on diversity 22 jurisdiction, be brought only in “(1) a judicial district where any defendant resides, if all 23 defendants are residents of the State in which the district is located, (2) a judicial district in which 24 a substantial part of the events or omissions giving rise to the claim occurred, or a substantial part 25 of the property that is the subject of the action is situated, or (3) if there is no district in which an 26 action may otherwise be brought as provided in this section, any judicial district in which any 27 defendant is subject to the court’s personal jurisdiction with respect to such action.” 28 U.S.C. § 28 1391(b). 1 In this case, the claim arose in Marin County, which is in the Northern District of 2 California. Therefore, plaintiff’s claim should have been filed in the United States District Court 3 for the Northern District of California. In the interest of justice, a federal court may transfer a 4 complaint filed in the wrong district to the correct district. See 28 U.S.C. § 1406(a); Starnes v. 5 McGuire, 512 F.2d 918, 932 (D.C. Cir. 1974). 6 Accordingly, IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that this matter is transferred to the United 7 States District Court for the Northern District of California. 8 IT IS SO ORDERED. 9 10 Dated: July 17, 2023 /s/ Gary S. Austin UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28