(PC)Giron v. Johnson

• Court: District Court, E.D. California
• Decided: May 26, 2020
• Docket: 1:20-cv-00711
• Status: Unknown

Opinion

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 9 EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA 10 11 MIGUEL GIRON, Case No. 1:20-cv-00711-BAM (PC) 12 Plaintiff, ORDER TRANSFERRING CASE TO THE CENTRAL DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA 13 v. 14 JOHNSON, et al., 15 Defendants. 16 17 Plaintiff Miguel Giron (“Plaintiff”), a state prisoner proceeding pro se, has filed a civil 18 rights action pursuant to 42 U.S.C. § 1983, together with a motion to proceed in forma pauperis 19 pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1915. (ECF Nos. 1, 2.) 20 The federal venue statute requires that a civil action, other than one based on diversity 21 jurisdiction, be brought only in “(1) a judicial district where any defendant resides, if all 22 defendants are residents of the State in which the district is located, (2) a judicial district in which 23 a substantial part of the events or omissions giving rise to the claim occurred, or a substantial part 24 of the property that is the subject of the action is situated, or (3) if there is no district in which an 25 action may otherwise be brought as provided in this section, any judicial district in which any 26 defendant is subject to the court’s personal jurisdiction with respect to such action.” 28 U.S.C. 27 § 1391(b). 28 /// 1 In this case, none of the defendants reside in this district. The claims arose in Los Angeles 2 County, which is in the Central District of California. Therefore, Plaintiff’s claim should have 3 been filed in the United States District Court for the Central District of California. In the interest 4 of justice, a federal court may transfer a complaint filed in the wrong district to the correct 5 district. See 28 U.S.C. § 1406(a); Ravelo Monegro v. Rosa, 211 F.3d 509, 512 (9th Cir. 2000). 6 Accordingly, IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that: 7 1. This matter is transferred to the United States District Court for the Central District of 8 California; and 9 2. This Court has not yet ruled on Plaintiff’s motion to proceed in forma pauperis. (ECF No. 10 2.) 11 IT IS SO ORDERED. 12

13 Dated: May 26, 2020 /s/ Barbara A. McAuliffe _ UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE 14

15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28