Casey Tay Johnson v. C. Gipson et al
Filing
6
ORDER TRANSFERRING CASE: This action is transferred to the Western Division of the United States District Court for the Central District of California. The Clerk shall transfer the case forthwith. Signed by Magistrate Judge Donna M. Ryu on 1/24/2017. (ig, COURT STAFF) (Filed on 1/24/2017) [Transferred from California Northern on 1/25/2017.]
1
2
3
4
5
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
6
NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA
7
8
CASEY TAY JOHNSON,
Case No. 16-cv-06940-DMR (PR)
Plaintiff,
9
ORDER OF TRANSFER
v.
10
11
C. GIPSON, et al.,
United States District Court
Northern District of California
Defendants.
12
13
On December 2, 2016, Plaintiff filed a pro se civil rights complaint pursuant to 42 U.S.C.
14
§ 1983 stemming from constitutional violations that occurred at California State Prison-Los
15
Angeles County (“CSP-LAC”) in Lancaster, California, where he is currently incarcerated. Dkt.
16
1. Plaintiff also filed an in forma pauperis (“IFP”) application. Dkt. 2.
17
On the same day the action was filed, the Clerk of the Court notified Plaintiff that his IFP
18
application was deficient because of his failure to use the proper form and include a certificate of
19
funds as well as his prisoner trust account statement. The Clerk’s notice informed Plaintiff that he
20
must submit his IFP application on the proper form and provide the aforementioned supporting
21
documents within twenty-eight days or his action would be dismissed. More than twenty-eight
22
days have passed since December 2, 2016, the date the Clerk’s notice was sent to Plaintiff. To
23
date, he has not submitted a completed IFP application on the proper form or any of the requisite
24
supporting documents.
25
26
27
28
Plaintiff has consented to magistrate judge jurisdiction, and this matter has been assigned
to the undersigned Magistrate Judge. Dkt. 3.
The acts complained of occurred at CSP-LAC, which is located in the Western Division of
the Central District of California, and it appears that Defendants reside in that district. Venue,
1
2
therefore, properly lies in that district and not in this one. See 28 U.S.C. § 1391(b).
Accordingly, in the interest of justice and pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1406(a), this action is
3
TRANSFERRED to the Western Division of the United States District Court for the Central
4
District of California. The Clerk shall transfer the case forthwith.
5
If Plaintiff wishes to further pursue this action, he must complete the IFP application
6
required by the Western Division of the United States District Court for the Central District of
7
California and mail the IFP application and any supporting documents to that district.
8
9
10
United States District Court
Northern District of California
11
12
13
All pending motions are TERMINATED on this court’s docket as no longer pending in
this district.
IT IS SO ORDERED.
Dated: January 24, 2017
______________________________________
DONNA M. RYU
United States Magistrate Judge
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
2
1
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
2
NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA
3
4
CASEY TAY JOHNSON,
Case No. 4:16-cv-06940-DMR
Plaintiff,
5
v.
CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE
6
7
C. GIPSON, et al.,
Defendants.
8
9
10
I, the undersigned, hereby certify that I am an employee in the Office of the Clerk, U.S.
District Court, Northern District of California.
United States District Court
Northern District of California
11
12
13
14
15
That on January 24, 2017, I SERVED a true and correct copy(ies) of the attached, by
placing said copy(ies) in a postage paid envelope addressed to the person(s) hereinafter listed, by
depositing said envelope in the U.S. Mail, or by placing said copy(ies) into an inter-office delivery
receptacle located in the Clerk's office.
16
17
18
Casey Tay Johnson
T-50658
PO Box 4670
Lancaster, CA 93539
19
20
Dated: January 24, 2017
21
22
Susan Y. Soong
Clerk, United States District Court
23
24
25
26
27
By:________________________
Ivy Lerma Garcia, Deputy Clerk to the
Honorable DONNA M. RYU
28
3
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?