JMYK P.C. v. Washington State Bar Ass'n

Ninth Circuit

JMYK P.C. v. Washington State Bar Ass'n

126 F. App'x 410

Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit·Decided April 13, 2005·No. No. 04-56213; D.C. No. CY-04-02888-DT·Published

Opinion

MEMORANDUM

**

John M. Keefe appeals the judgment of the district court dismissing his civil rights action for lack of subject matter jurisdiction and improper venue. We have jurisdiction under 28 U.S.C. § 1291. We review for an abuse of discretion a dismissal for improper venue. Bruns v. Nat’l Credit Union Admin., 122 F.3d 1251, 1253 (9th Cir.1997). We affirm.

The district court correctly dismissed Keefe’s civil rights action for improper venue because it is undisputed that the Washington State Bar Association does not reside in, nor did a substantial part of the events forming the basis of Keefe’s claims take place in the Central District of California. See 28 U.S.C. § 1391(b)(l)-(2); King v. Russell, 963 F.2d 1301, 1304 (9th Cir.1992) (per curiam). All pending motions are denied as moot.

AFFIRMED.

This disposition is not appropriate for publication and may not be cited to or by the courts of this circuit except as provided by Ninth Circuit Rule 36-3.

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

MEMORANDUM

**

John M. Keefe appeals the judgment of the district court dismissing his civil rights action for lack of subject matter jurisdiction and improper venue. We have jurisdiction under 28 U.S.C. § 1291. We review for an abuse of discretion a dismissal for improper venue. Bruns v. Nat’l Credit Union Admin., 122 F.3d 1251, 1253 (9th Cir.1997). We affirm.

The district court correctly dismissed Keefe’s civil rights action for improper venue because it is undisputed that the Washington State Bar Association does not reside in, nor did a substantial part of the events forming the basis of Keefe’s claims take place in the Central District of California. See 28 U.S.C. § 1391(b)(l)-(2); King v. Russell, 963 F.2d 1301, 1304 (9th Cir.1992) (per curiam). All pending motions are denied as moot.

AFFIRMED.

This disposition is not appropriate for publication and may not be cited to or by the courts of this circuit except as provided by Ninth Circuit Rule 36-3.

JMYK P.C. v. Washington State Bar Ass'n, 126 F. App'x 410 (9th Cir. 2005).

Pincite

126 F. App'x 410 (JMYK P.C. v. Washington State Bar Ass'n) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.

Opinion

Related