Gary Lee Hensley et al v. County of Ventura et al

Filing 3

ORDER signed by Magistrate Judge Dale A. Drozd on 10/27/14. CASE TRANSFERRED to Central District of California. (Manzer, C) [Transferred from California Eastern on 10/30/2014.]

1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

9

FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

10
11

GARY LEE HENSLEY,

12

Plaintiff,

13
14

No. 2:14-cv-1740 MCE DAD PS

v.

ORDER

COUNTY OF VENTURA, et al.,

15

Defendants.

16
Plaintiff, Gary Hensley, is proceeding in this action pro se. This matter was referred to the

17
18

undersigned in accordance with Local Rule 302(c)(21) and 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1). Plaintiff has

19

filed a complaint and has requested leave to proceed in forma pauperis pursuant to 28 U.S.C. §

20

1915.

21

The allegations of plaintiff’s complaint, however, reveal that both plaintiff and the named

22

defendants reside in Ventura County, California, and that the events at issue also occurred in

23

Ventura County, California. Venue in a civil action is proper in (1) a judicial district where any

24

defendant resides, if all defendants reside in the same State in which the district is located, (2) a

25

judicial district in which a substantial part of the events or omissions giving rise to the claim

26

occurred or (3) a judicial district in which any defendant is subject to personal jurisdiction at the

27

time the action is commenced, if there is no district in which the action may otherwise be brought.

28

28 U.S.C. § 1391(b).
1

1

Here, the complaint alleges that the events giving rise to this action took place in Ventura

2

County, California, which is also where the named defendants reside and are located. This action,

3

therefore, should have been brought in the United States District Court for the Central District of

4

California, as Ventura County is part of that district. In the interests of justice, this action will be

5

transferred to the United States District Court for the Central District of California for further

6

proceedings, including a ruling on plaintiff’s application to proceed in forma pauperis and the

7

screening of plaintiff’s complaint. See 28 U.S.C. § 1404(a).

8
9
10

Accordingly, IT IS ORDERED that this action is transferred to the United States District
Court for the Central District of California.
Dated: October 27, 2014

11
12
13
14

DAD:6
Ddad1\orders.pro se\hensley17404.transfer.ord.docx

15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
2