Murrell v. Theiler, et al

Filing 4

ORDER signed by Magistrate Judge Craig M. Kellison on 6/22/10 ORDERING that this matter, along with all pending Motions and/or Requests, is TRANSFERRED to the United States District Court for the Central District of California. (Mena-Sanchez, L)

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 vs. WALTER THEILER, et al., Defendants. / Plaintiff, who is proceeding pro se, brings this civil action. For cases such as this, which are based on federal question jurisdiction, the federal venue statute requires that the action 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 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). Here, it appears that a substantial part of the events giving rise to the instant action occurred in Santa Barbara, California, which is within the boundaries of the United States District Court for the Central /// 1 JOYCE ANN MURRELL, Plaintiff, ORDER No. CIV S-10-1515-LKK-CMK IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

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

District of California.1 Therefore, the court finds that this action most appropriately proceeds in that district. In the interest of justice, the court will transfer this case. See 28 U.S.C. § 1406(a). Accordingly, IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that this matter, along with all pending motions and/or requests, is transferred to the United States District Court for the Central District of California.

DATED: June 22, 2010 ______________________________________ CRAIG M. KELLISON UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE

This court may take judicial notice of state court records, see Kasey v. Molybdenum Corp. of America, 336 F.2d 560, 563 (9th Cir. 1964), as well as its own records, see Chandler v. U.S., 378 F.2d 906, 909 (9th Cir. 1967). Plaintiff filed prior actions in this court on nearly identical complaints. See case nos. CIV-S-09-0234-MCE-KJM and CIV-S-10-0367JAM-CMK. Those actions were transferred to the Central District. 2

1