Favor v. Harper et al

Filing 2

ORDER TRANSFERRING CASE to the Central District of California signed by Magistrate Judge Erica P. Grosjean on 8/1/2017. (Sant Agata, S)

1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

9

EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

10
11

BRANDON ALEXANDER FAVOR,

12
13

Plaintiff,
v.

14

ORDER TRANSFERRING CASE TO THE
CENTRAL DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

RAQUEL HARPER, ET AL.,

15

1:17-cv-01024-LJO-EPG

Defendant.

16
17
18
19

Plaintiff, a state prisoner proceeding pro se, has filed a civil rights action pursuant to 42
U.S.C. ' 1983.
The federal venue statute requires that a civil action, other than one based on diversity

20

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

21

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

22

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

23

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

24

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

25

In this case, none of the defendants reside in this district. The claim arose in Los Angeles

26

County, which is in the Central District of California. Therefore, plaintiff=s claim should have

27

been filed in the United States District Court for the Central District of California. In the interest

28

of justice, a federal court may transfer a complaint filed in the wrong district to the correct
1

1
2
3

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.

4
5
6

IT IS SO ORDERED.
Dated:

August 1, 2017

/s/
UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE

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

2