Christian v. California Department of Corrections & Rehabilitation, et al

Filing 9

ORDER; ORDER TO SHOW CAUSE signed by Magistrate Judge Edmund F. Brennan on 6/29/15 ORDERING that Plaintiffs request to proceed in forma pauperis (ECF No. 6 ) is granted. Plaintiff shall pay the statutory filing fee of $350. All payments sha ll be collected in accordance with the notice to the California Department of Corrections and Rehabilitation filed concurrently herewith. Plaintiff shall show cause, within 30 days of the date of service of this order, why this action, which appears to be based upon events that arose at the California Mens Colony, should not be transferred to the United States District Court for the Central District of California.(Dillon, M)

1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

9

FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

10
11

EMMETT WADE CHRISTIAN,

12

Plaintiff,

13
14
15

No. 2:15-cv-0541-JAM-EFB P

v.
CALIFORNIA DEPARTMENT OF
CORRECTIONS AND
REHABILITATION, et al.,

16

ORDER GRANTING IFP AND FOR
PLAINTIFF TO SHOW CAUSE WHY
ACTION SHOULD NOT BE TRANSFERRED
TO UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
FOR CENTRAL DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

Defendants.

17
Plaintiff is a state prisoner proceeding without counsel in an action brought under 42

18
19

U.S.C. § 1983. In addition to filing a complaint, he has filed an application to proceed in forma

20

pauperis pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1915.

21

I.

Request to Proceed In Forma Pauperis
Plaintiff’s application makes the showing required by 28 U.S.C. § 1915(a)(1) and (2).

22
23

Accordingly, by separate order, the court directs the agency having custody of plaintiff to collect

24

and forward the appropriate monthly payments for the filing fee as set forth in 28 U.S.C.

25

§ 1915(b)(1) and (2).

26

II.

Screening Requirement

27

Federal courts must engage in a preliminary screening of cases in which prisoners seek

28

redress from a governmental entity or officer or employee of a governmental entity. 28 U.S.C.
1

1

§ 1915A(a). The court must identify cognizable claims or dismiss the complaint, or any portion

2

of the complaint, if the complaint “is frivolous, malicious, or fails to state a claim upon which

3

relief may be granted,” or “seeks monetary relief from a defendant who is immune from such

4

relief.” Id. § 1915A(b).

5

III.

Discussion

6

Plaintiff is an inmate confined to Folsom State Prison. He alleges that defendants

7

retaliated against him by attaching an “R suffix”1 to his custody status, in violation of his rights

8

under the First, Eighth and Fourteenth Amendments. ECF No. 1.

9

Plaintiff claims that venue is proper in this district because “a substantial part of the events

10

giving rise to the claim occurred at California Department of Correction and Rehabilitation.” Id.

11

¶ 8. He also claims that the events giving rise to this lawsuit occurred at both the California

12

Men’s Colony and in Folsom County [sic]. Id. ¶ 20. In the section of the complaint identifying

13

the parties, plaintiff lists each defendant as being an “employee at Folsom State Prison” when the

14

alleged wrong “was committed.” Id. ¶¶ 10-19.

15

The defendants who allegedly applied the “R suffix,” however, are alleged to be members

16

of the Inmate Classification Committee for the California Men’s Colony. Id. at 7 (“I was seen by

17

CMC West, Inmate Classification committee Members-(ICC) T. KING, (Chairperson), B. Speer,

18

(CCII); L. Romero, A. Orozco, (Recorder)CCIII), M. Phillips(CCII)(CC-IIA) and based solely on

19

the Police Report they applied the ‘R-Suffix’ to my custody 6-years after.”). Apart from

20

plaintiff’s vague allegation that the “Folsom ICC” refused to remove the “R suffix,” id. at 9, there

21

is no indication that any part of plaintiff’s claims arose in Folsom, or that venue is otherwise

22

proper in this district.

23

The federal venue statute requires that a civil action, other than one based on diversity

24

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

25

defendants are residents of the State in which the district is located; (2) a judicial district in which

26

a substantial part of the events or omissions giving rise to the claim occurred, or a substantial part

27
28

1

Pursuant to Title 15, section 3377.1 of the California Code of Regulations, inmates with
a history of specific sex offenses are assigned an “R” suffix custody designation.
2

1

of the property that is the subject of the action is situated; or (3) if there is no district in which an

2

action may otherwise be brought as provided in this section, any judicial district in which any

3

defendant is subject to the court’s personal jurisdiction with respect to such action.” 28 U.S.C.

4

§ 1391(b). The allegations here that officials at the California Men’s Colony violated plaintiff’s

5

constitutional rights arose in San Louis Obispo County, which is in the Central District of

6

California, suggest that this action should have been brought in the United States District Court

7

for the Central District of California. Although the complaint includes conclusory allegations that

8

venue is proper in this district, it is devoid of any specific allegations to demonstrate the same.

9

IV.

10

Summary of Order
Accordingly, IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that:

11

1. Plaintiff’s request to proceed in forma pauperis (ECF No. 6) is granted.

12

2. Plaintiff shall pay the statutory filing fee of $350. All payments shall be collected

13

in accordance with the notice to the California Department of Corrections and

14

Rehabilitation filed concurrently herewith.

15

3. Plaintiff shall show cause, within thirty days of the date of service of this order,

16

why this action, which appears to be based upon events that arose at the California

17

Men’s Colony, should not be transferred to the United States District Court for the

18

Central District of California.

19

DATED: June 29, 2015.

20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
3