Rasheed v Gipson
Filing
2
ORDER, CASE TRANSFERRED to Northern District of California signed by Magistrate Judge Dennis L. Beck on 11/22/2011.(Sant Agata, S)
<![CDATA[
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
9
FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA
10
11
TAHEE ABDULLAH RASHEED,
1:11-cv-01898-DLB (HC)
12
13
ORDER TRANSFERRING CASE TO THE
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR
THE NORTHEN DISTRICT OF
CALIFORNIA
Petitioner,
14
vs.
15
C. GIPSON,
16
Respondent.
17
/
18
19
20
Petitioner, a state prisoner proceeding pro se, has filed a habeas corpus action pursuant to 28
U.S.C. § 2254.
21
The federal venue statute requires that a civil action, other than one based on diversity
22
jurisdiction, be brought only in “(1) a judicial district where any defendant resides, if all defendants reside
23
in the same state, (2) a judicial district in which a substantial part of the events or omissions giving rise
24
to the claim occurred, or a substantial part of the property that is the subject of the action is situated, or
25
(3) a judicial district in which any defendant may be found, if there is no district in which the action may
26
otherwise be brought.” 28 U.S.C. § 1391(b).
27
In this case, the petitioner is challenging a conviction from San Francisco County, which is in the
28
Northen District of California. Therefore, the petition should have been filed in the United States District
-1-
1
Court for the Northern District of California. In the interest of justice, a federal court may transfer a case
2
filed in the wrong district to the correct district. See 28 U.S.C. § 1406(a); Starnes v. McGuire, 512 F.2d
3
918, 932 (D.C. Cir. 1974).
4
5
Accordingly, IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that this matter is transferred to the United States
District Court for the Northen District of California.
6
7
8
IT IS SO ORDERED.
Dated:
ah0l4d
November 22, 2011
/s/ Dennis L. Beck
UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
-2-
]]>
Disclaimer: Justia Dockets & Filings provides public litigation records from the federal appellate and district courts. These filings and docket sheets should not be considered findings of fact or liability, nor do they necessarily reflect the view of Justia.
Why Is My Information Online?
