Hardney v. Ferguson et al.

Filing 10

ORDER signed by Magistrate Judge Deborah Barnes on 03/31/17 ordering CASE TRANSFERRED the U.S. District Court for the Northern District of California. The court has not ruled on plaintiff's application to proceed in forma pauperis. (Plummer, M)

1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

9

FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

10
11

JOHN HARDNEY,

12

No. 2:15-cv-2617 KJM DB P

Plaintiff,

13

v.

ORDER

14

JEFFREY FERGUSON, et al.,

15

Defendants.

16
Plaintiff is a state prisoner proceeding pro se in this civil rights action pursuant to 42

17
18

U.S.C. § 1983. Plaintiff’s complaint and application to proceed in forma pauperis are before the

19

court.

20

The federal venue statute provides that a civil action “may be brought in (1) a judicial

21

district in which any defendant resides, if all defendants are residents of the State in which the

22

district is located, (2) a judicial district in which a substantial part of the events or omissions

23

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

24

is situated, or (3) if there is no district in which an action may otherwise be brought as provided in

25

this action, any judicial district in which any defendant is subject to the court’s personal

26

jurisdiction with respect to such action.” 28 U.S.C. § 1391(b).

27
28

In this case, the claim arose while plaintiff was housed at Pelican Bay State Prison in
Crescent City, California, which is in the Northern District of California. Therefore, plaintiff’s
1

1

claim should have been filed in the United States District Court for the Northern District of

2

California. In the interest of justice, a federal court may transfer a complaint filed in the wrong

3

district to the correct district. See 28 U.S.C. § 1406(a); Starnes v. McGuire, 512 F.2d 918, 932

4

(D.C. Cir. 1974).

5

Accordingly, IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that this matter is transferred to the United

6

States District Court for the Northern District of California. The court has not ruled on plaintiff’s

7

application to proceed in forma pauperis.

8

Dated: March 31, 2017

9
10
11
12

/DLB7;
DB/Inbox/Routine/hard2517.21

13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
2