(PC) Lawrence v. Newsom ( 2022 )

1 2 3 4 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 5 NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA 6 7 RISHARDO LAWRENCE, Case No. 22-cv-05056-KAW 8 Plaintiff, ORDER DENYING REQUEST TO 9 v. RETAIN CASE IN THE NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA 10 GAVIN NEWSOM, et al., Re: Dkt. No. 3 11 Defendants. 12 13 Plaintiff Rishardo Lawrence is an inmate at the California Medical Facility in Vacaville, 14 California. (Compl. at 1, Dkt. No. 1.) On September 6, 2022, Plaintiff filed the instant complaint 15 for retirement damages and failure to grant a medical parole hearing for Plaintiff. On September 16 16, 2022, Plaintiff filed a “Request to Retain Case in the Northern District San Francisco,” arguing 17 that the case should not be refiled in the Eastern District of California because “the Eastern 18 District is overcome by the volume of cases filed by inmates in the CSP Solano and CSP-CMF 19 prisons.” (Dkt. No. 3.) 20 Venue generally is proper in a judicial district in which: (1) any defendant resides, if all 21 defendants are residents of the state in which the district is located; (2) a substantial part of the 22 events or omissions giving rise to the claim occurred, or a substantial part of property that is the 23 subject of the action is situated; or (3) any defendant is subject to the court’s personal jurisdiction, 24 if there is no district in which the action may otherwise be brought. 28 U.S.C. § 1391(b). Venue 25 may be raised by the court sua sponte where the defendant has not yet filed a responsive pleading 26 and the time for doing so has not run. Costlow v. Weeks, 790 F.2d 1486, 1488 (9th Cir. 1986). 27 Orders respecting venue are interlocutory in nature and are not appealable prior to final judgment. 1 Here, as Plaintiff acknowledges, the case should have been filed in the Eastern District of 2 || California. Plaintiff cites no authority suggesting that the Court may “retain” the case in an 3 |} improper judicial district. Where a case is filed in the wrong venue, the district court has the 4 || discretion either to dismiss the case or transfer it to the proper federal court “in the interest of 5 || justice.” See 28 U.S.C. § 1406(a). Accordingly, the Court DENIES Plaintiff's motion to retain 6 || the case in this district and TRANSFERS the case to the Eastern District of California. 7 IT IS SO ORDERED. 8 Dated: October 31, 2022 . ? Kens A. Hl STMORE 10 United States Magistrate Judge 11 12 15 16 = 17 Z 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28