Azam Azimi v. Arcadis U.S., Inc.

• Court: District Court, E.D. California
• Decided: September 3, 2025
• Docket: 1:25-cv-01181
• Status: Unknown

Opinion

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT CENTRAL DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

CIVIL MINUTES – GENERAL

Case No. 8:25-cv-01883-DOC-ADS Date: September 3, 2025

Title: Azam Azimi v. Arcadis U.S., Inc.

PRESENT:

THE HONORABLE DAVID O. CARTER, JUDGE

Karlen Dubon Not Present Courtroom Clerk Court Reporter

ATTORNEYS PRESENT FOR ATTORNEYS PRESENT FOR PLAINTIFF: DEFENDANT: None Present None Present

PROCEEDINGS (IN CHAMBERS): ORDER TO SHOW CAUSE RE: TRANSFER TO NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

Under 28 U.S.C. §1391(b), venue is generally proper in a “judicial district in which any defendant resides, if all defendants are residents of the State in which the district is located” or a “judicial district in which a substantial part of the events or omissions giving rise to the claim occurred, or a substantial part of property that is subject to the action is situated.” 28 U.S.C §1391(b).

“For the convenience of parties and witnesses, in the interest of justice, a district court may transfer any civil action to any other district or division where it might have been brought ...” 28 U.S.C. § 1404(a). The Court may transfer a case sua sponte under Section 1404(a). See Washington Pub. Utilities Grp. v. U.S. Dist. Ct. for W. Dist. of Washington, 843 F.2d 319, 326 (9th Cir. 1987) (affirming a “sua sponte order to change venue” to another district).

The Parties are ordered to show cause by Monday, September 8, 2025, why the Court should not transfer this case to the U.S. District Court for the Northern District of California. Based on Plaintiff’s Complaint (Dkt. 1), the operative facts occurred in Defendant’s San Francisco office and the key witnesses appear to be in the Bay Area. CIVIL MINUTES – GENERAL

Page 2

Because Defendant is not alleged to reside in California, for venue to be proper in this District, a substantial part of the events must have occurred in the Central District which does not appear to be the case. Further, the Complaint states that the matter should be assigned to either the San Francisco or Oakland divisions which suggests Plaintiff may have intended to file in the Northern District of California.

The Court will consider submissions in response to this Order of no more than five pages. Failure to respond will result in transfer.

The Clerk shall serve this minute order on the parties.

MINUTES FORM 11 Initials of Deputy Clerk: kdu CIVIL-GEN