Alexander v. Social Security Administration

CourtDistrict Court, S.D. California
DecidedMarch 5, 2024
Docket3:24-cv-00253
StatusUnknown

This text of Alexander v. Social Security Administration (Alexander v. Social Security Administration) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering District Court, S.D. California primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook
Alexander v. Social Security Administration, (S.D. Cal. 2024).

Opinion

1 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 2 SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA 3 LIAM A., Case No.: 24-cv-0253-AGS-BGS

4 Plaintiff, ORDER TRANSFERRING CIVIL 5 v. ACTION FOR LACK OF PROPER VENUE 6 7 SOCIAL SECURITY ADMINISTRATION, 8

9 Defendant. 10 11 Plaintiff, proceeding without an attorney, seems to have filed his complaint against 12 the Social Security Administration in the wrong court. (See ECF 1.) He lists his county of 13 residence as Los Angeles (see ECF 1-1) and his street address in Beverly Hills, Los Angeles 14 County (see ECF 1, at 1). Nothing connects his case to this District. 15 Plaintiff has the burden of “proving that venue is proper in the district in which the 16 suit was initiated.” Airola v. King, 505 F. Supp. 30, 31 (D. Ariz. 1980). The court itself 17 may raise venue defects when the defendant has not yet filed a responsive pleading and the 18 time for doing so has not run. Costlow v. Weeks, 790 F.2d 1486, 1488 (9th Cir. 1986). 19 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; [or] (2) a 21 judicial district in which a substantial part of the events or omissions giving rise to the 22 claim occurred, or a substantial part of property that is the subject of the action is 23 situated[.]” 28 U.S.C. § 1391(b); Costlow, 790 F.2d at 1488. If a case “falls within” these 24 categories, then “venue is proper: if it does not, venue is improper, and the case must be 25 dismissed or transferred.” Atlantic Marine Const. Co. v. United States Dist. Ct. for W. Dist. 26 of Texas, 571 U.S. 49, 56 (2013). 27 “The Southern District of California comprises the counties of Imperial and 28 San Diego.” 28 U.S.C. § 84(d). Yet no event or omission giving rise to this suit allegedly 1 || occurred in these counties, and no defendant is alleged to reside here. So, the proper venue 2 ||is the Central District of California, Western Division. See 28 U.S.C. § 1391(b); Costlow, 3 F.2d at 1488. 4 Thus, the Clerk must TRANSFER this civil action for lack of proper venue, in the 5 ||interests of justice, and for the convenience of the parties, to the United States District 6 || Court for the Central District of California, Western Division. 7 || Dated: March 5, 2024

9 Hon. rew G. Schopler United States District Judge 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 2 a me

Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
Alexander v. Social Security Administration, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/alexander-v-social-security-administration-casd-2024.