Trotter v. Schwarzenegger

Filing 7

ORDER of INTRADISTRICT TRANSFER from Sacramento (2:10-cv-2071 GGH) to Fresno (1:10-cv-1971 JLT) signed by Magistrate Judge Gregory G. Hollows on 10/21/10. (Dillon, M)

Download PDF
(HC) Trotter v. Schwarzenegger Doc. 7 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 The appropriate venue for allegations against defendants located at CCI in Tehachapi, plaintiff was informed, was within the Fresno Division of the Eastern District of California. See id. 1 Dockets.Justia.com 1 IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA JAMES TROTTER, Plaintiff, vs. F. GONZALEZ, Warden, et al., Defendants. / Plaintiff, a state prisoner housed at the California Correctional Institution (CCI), proceeding pro se, purported to initiate this action as both a habeas petition and a civil rights action. By order, filed on August 27, 2010, the petition/complaint was dismissed with leave to amend within twenty-eight days to set forth a colorable civil rights action with at least one named defendant located within this court division and district,1 but he was informed that if he wished to proceed in a habeas petition to challenge a prison disciplinary conviction at California State Prison - Los Angeles, he should move for voluntary dismissal of this action and file any such petition within the Central District of California. See August 27, 2010 order. Plaintiff was also ORDER No. CIV S-10-2071 GGH P 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 directed to submit an affidavit in support of his request to proceed in forma pauperis or the appropriate filing fee and informed within the order of the much higher fees for filing a civil rights action. Plaintiff filed a motion to proceed in forma pauperis on October 7, 2010 and, on October 12, 2010, filed a document which the court has construed as an amended civil rights complaint. In the amended complaint, plaintiff seeks to allege violations of his rights by defendants. A portion of the alleged violations, to the extent any can be discerned, appear to have taken place in Kern County, which is part of the Fresno Division of the United States District Court for the Eastern District of California. See Local Rule 120(d). Any other violations appear to have occurred within the Central District. Pursuant to Local Rule 120(f), a civil action which has not been commenced in the proper division of a court may, on the court's own motion, be transferred to the proper division of the court. Therefore, this action will be transferred to the Fresno Division of the court. Good cause appearing, IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that: 1. The court has not ruled on plaintiff's application to proceed in forma pauperis; 2. The case is to be captioned Trotter v. Gonzalez, et al., and re-designated by the Clerk of the Court as one brought pursuant to 42 U.S.C. 1983; 3. This action is transferred to the United States District Court for the Eastern District of California sitting in Fresno; and \\\\\ \\\\\ \\\\\ \\\\\ \\\\\ \\\\\ 2 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 GGH:009 trot2071.22+ 4. All future filings shall reference the new Fresno case number assigned and shall be filed at: United States District Court Eastern District of California 2500 Tulare Street Fresno, CA 93721 DATED: October 21, 2010 /s/ Gregory G. Hollows UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE 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?