Freddy Rodriguez v. Kate Holland
ORDER Transferring Case to the United States District Court for the Central District of California, signed by Magistrate Judge Barbara A. McAuliffe on 2/4/13. CASE TRANSFERRED. (Verduzco, M) [Transferred from California Eastern on 2/5/2013.]
IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA
1:13-cv-00129 BAM (HC)
ORDER TRANSFERRING CASE TO THE
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR
THE CENTRAL DISTRICT OF
Petitioner, a state prisoner proceeding pro se, has filed a habeas corpus action pursuant to 28
U.S.C. § 2254, together with a request to proceed in forma pauperis pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1915.
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 defendants
reside in the same state, (2) a judicial district in which a substantial part of the events or omissions
giving rise to the claim occurred, or a substantial part of the property that is the subject of the action is
situated, or (3) a judicial district in which any defendant may be found, if there is no district in which
the action may otherwise be brought.” 28 U.S.C. § 1391(b).
In this case, the petitioner is challenging a conviction from Orange County, which is in the
Central District of California. Therefore, the petition should have been filed in the United States District
Court for the Cental District of California. In the interest of justice, a federal court may transfer a case
filed in the wrong district to the correct district. See 28 U.S.C. § 1406(a); Starnes v. McGuire, 512 F.2d
918, 932 (D.C. Cir. 1974).
Accordingly, IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that this matter is transferred to the United States
District Court for the Central District of California.
IT IS SO ORDERED.
February 4, 2013
/s/ Barbara A. McAuliffe
UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE
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?