Smith v. California Mens Colony State Prison
Filing
4
ORDER signed by Magistrate Judge Edmund F. Brennan on 6/28/11 ORDERING that this case is TRANSFERRED to the Central District of California.(Dillon, M)
<![CDATA[
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
9
FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA
10
ROBERT G. SMITH
Plaintiff,
11
12
13
No. CIV S-11-1600 EFB (TEMP) P
vs.
CALIFORNIA MEN’S COLONY,
et al.,
14
Defendants.
16
ORDER
/
15
Plaintiff is a prisoner confined in California Men’s Colony, East. In the action he seeks
17
to commence, he is without counsel. It appears that he intends to seek relief for alleged civil
18
rights violations. See 42 U.S.C. § 1983. On June 13, 2011, he filed an affidavit regarding his
19
treatment by prison staff.1 Plaintiff has not paid the filing fee or sought leave to proceed in
20
forma pauperis, nor has he filed a verified complaint.
21
22
The federal venue statute requires that a civil action, other than one based on diversity
jurisdiction, be brought only in “(1) a judicial district where any defendant resides, if all
23
24
25
26
1
Plaintiff makes statements in his affidavit that evince a possibly urgent situation in
which he threatens to do himself harm. Prior to issuing this order, the court alerted plaintiffs’
class counsel in Coleman v. Schwarzenegger, Civil Action No. 2:90-cv-0520 LKK JFM P, of
plaintiff’s statements in his affidavit, for the purpose of obtaining immediate mental health
assistance for plaintiff, if possible.
1
1
defendants reside in the same State, (2) a judicial district in which a substantial part of the events
2
or omissions giving rise to the claim occurred, or a substantial part of property that is the subject
3
of the action is situated, or (3) a judicial district in which any defendant may be found, if there is
4
no district in which the action may otherwise be brought.” 28 U.S.C. § 1391(b).
5
In this case, none of the defendants resides in this district. The claim arose in San Luis
6
Obispo County, which is in the Central District of California. Therefore, plaintiff’s claim should
7
have been filed in the United States District Court for the Central District of California. In the
8
interest of justice, a federal court may transfer a complaint filed in the wrong district to the
9
correct district. See 28 U.S.C. § 1406(a); Starnes v. McGuire, 512 F.2d 918, 932 (D.C. Cir.
10
11
1974).
Accordingly, IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that this matter is transferred to the United
12
States District Court for the Central District of California.
13
DATED: June 28, 2011.
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
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?
