William Lee Walker, Plaintiff-appellant, v. Riverside County Sheriff's Department, et al., Defendant-appellee, 972 F.2d 1348 (9th Cir. 1992)

Annotate this Case
US Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit - 972 F.2d 1348 (9th Cir. 1992) Submitted July 29, 1992. *Decided Aug. 12, 1992

Before TANG, BEEZER and KOZINSKI, Circuit Judges.


MEMORANDUM** 

William Lee Walker, a California state prisoner, appeals pro se the district court's order transferring his 42 U.S.C. § 1983 action from the Eastern District of California to the Central District of California pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1406(a). We dismiss this appeal for lack of jurisdiction.

Walker filed this action in the Eastern District of California, where he is currently incarcerated. He alleges civil rights violations during pre-trial detention by the Riverside County Sheriff's Department. All defendants reside in the Central District of California, and the claim arose in the Central District. The district court found that it lacked venue over the action pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1391(b) and transferred the action to the Central District pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1406(a).1 

An order transferring an action for improper venue pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1406(a) is not a final appealable order. Mook v. Brownell, 228 F.2d 412, 413 (9th Cir. 1955) (per curiam). Accordingly, we dismiss this appeal for lack of appellate jurisdiction.

DISMISSED.

 *

The panel unanimously finds this case suitable for decision without oral argument. Fed. R. App. P. 34(a); 9th Cir.R. 34-4

 **

This disposition is not appropriate for publication and may not be cited to or by the courts of this circuit except as provided by 9th Cir.R. 36-3

 1

Section 1406(a) provides:

The district court of a district in which is filed a case laying venue in the wrong division or district shall dismiss, or if it be in the interest of justice, transfer such case to any district or division in which it could have been brought.

Some case metadata and case summaries were written with the help of AI, which can produce inaccuracies. You should read the full case before relying on it for legal research purposes.

This site is protected by reCAPTCHA and the Google Privacy Policy and Terms of Service apply.