Jenkins ( 2021 )

1 2 3 4 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 5 NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA 6 7 JENKINS, Case No. 21-cv-06485-PJH 8 Plaintiff, ORDER OF TRANSFER v. 9 10 , Defendant. 11 12 13 This is a civil rights case brought pro se by a state prisoner. Plaintiff is 14 incarcerated in the Eastern District of Michigan and raises claims against defendants in 15 that district. He states that the Internal Revenue Service sent to him at his prison his 16 economic impact payment (“EIP”) pursuant to the Coronavirus Aid, Relief, and Economic Security Act (The “CARES Act”), Pub. L. No. 116-136, 134 Stat. 281 (2020). He 17 contends that prison officials deducted money for restitution and other charges. For 18 relief, he seeks prison officials in Michigan to provide him his funds. 19 In Scholl v. Mnuchin, 494 F. Supp. 3d 661 (N.D. Cal. 2020) this court found that 20 the Department of Treasury and Internal Revenue Service could not withhold advance 21 refunds or credits to individuals solely because they were incarcerated. Id. at 692. To 22 the extent plaintiff requests to proceed with his claim in this court and the Scholl case, 23 any such request is denied. Plaintiff’s claims involve entirely different defendants located 24 in the Eastern District of Michigan. Plaintiff’s claim involves interference by prison 25 officials in plaintiff receiving his EIP, not the issuance of funds by the Scholl defendants 26 and the CARES Act. 27 1 Venue, therefore, properly lies in that district and not in this one. See 28 U.S.C. 2 § 1391(b). This case is TRANSFERRED to the United States District Court for the 3 Eastern District of Michigan. See 28 U.S.C. § 1406(a). 4 IT IS SO ORDERED. 5 Dated: September 27, 2021 6 7 /s/ Phyllis J. Hamilton PHYLLIS J. HAMILTON 8 United States District Judge 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27