Shotwell v. Soto et al

Filing 4

ORDER TRANSFERRING Case to the Central District of California, signed by Magistrate Judge Sheila K. Oberto on 1/6/15. CASE CLOSED. (Marrujo, C)

1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

9

EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

10
11

PRINCE DEON SHOTWELL, JR.,

12

Plaintiff,

13

ORDER TRANSFERRING CASE TO THE
CENTRAL DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

v.

14

1:14-cv-02075-SKO (PC)

J. SOTO, et al.,

15

Defendants.

16
17

Plaintiff, a state prisoner proceeding pro se, has filed a civil rights action pursuant to 42

18

U.S.C. ' 1983. The federal venue statute requires that a civil action, other than one based on

19

diversity jurisdiction, be brought only in A(1) a judicial district where any defendant resides, if all

20

defendants reside in the same state, (2) a judicial district in which a substantial part of the events

21

or omissions giving rise to the claim occurred, or a substantial part of the property that is the

22

subject of the action is situated, or (3) a judicial district in which any defendant may be found, if

23

there is no district in which the action may otherwise be brought.@ 28 U.S.C. ' 1391(b).

24

In this case, the events giving rise to the plaintiff’s claims arose in Los Angeles County,

25

which is in the Central District of California. Therefore, this action should have been filed in the

26

United States District Court for the Central District of California. In the interest of justice, a

27

federal court may transfer a complaint filed in the wrong district to the correct district. See 28

28

U.S.C. ' 1406(a); Starnes v. McGuire, 512 F.2d 918, 932 (D.C. Cir. 1974).
1

1
2

Accordingly, IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that this matter is transferred to the United
States District Court for the Central District of California.

3
4
5

IT IS SO ORDERED.
Dated:

January 6, 2015

/s/ Sheila K. Oberto
UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE

6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28

2