Vaughn v. On Habeas Corpus
Filing
5
ORDER of Transfer, signed by Magistrate Judge Jennifer L. Thurston on 10/4/2016. (Martin-Gill, S)
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
9
FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA
10
11
MARK A. VAUGHN,
12
13
14
Petitioner,
No. 1:16-cv-01396-JLT (HC)
ORDER OF TRANSFER
v.
ON HABEAS CORPUS,
15
Respondent.
16
17
18
19
Petitioner, a state prisoner, has filed an application for a writ of habeas corpus pursuant to
28 U.S.C. § 2254.
The federal venue statute requires that a civil action, other than one based on diversity
20
jurisdiction, be brought only in “(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, Petitioner is challenging a prison disciplinary hearing held at California
26
Health Care Facility (“CHCF”) in Stockton, California, concerning events which occurred when
27
Petitioner was incarcerated at CHCF. CHCF is located in the Sacramento Division of the Eastern
28
District of California. Since the events giving rise to the claim took place at CHCF in Stockton,
1
1
California, the petition should have been filed in the Sacramento Division. In the interest of
2
justice, a federal court may transfer a case to the appropriate district. See 28 U.S.C. § 1406(a).
3
4
Accordingly, the Court ORDERS that this matter is transferred to the Sacramento
Division of the United States District Court for the Eastern District of California.
5
6
7
IT IS SO ORDERED.
Dated:
October 4, 2016
/s/ Jennifer L. Thurston
UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
2
Disclaimer: Justia Dockets & Filings provides public litigation records from the federal appellate and district courts. These filings and docket sheets should not be considered findings of fact or liability, nor do they necessarily reflect the view of Justia.
Why Is My Information Online?