(PC) Haynie v. Esquerra et al

Filing 13

ORDER GRANTING 11 Plaintiff's Motion to Change Venue; ORDER Transferring Case to Sacramento, signed by Magistrate Judge Helena M. Barch-Kuchta on 12/12/2022. CASE TRANSFERRRED to Sacramento Division. New Case Number 2:22-cv-02204-DB. Old Case Number 1:20-cv-01663-HBK. (Maldonado, C)

Case 2:22-cv-02204-DB Document 13 Filed 12/13/22 Page 1 of 2
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

9

FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

10
11

DONELL HAYNIE,

12

Plaintiff,

13

Case No. 1:20-cv-01663-HBK (PC)
ORDER GRANTING PLAINTIFF’S MOTION
FOR TO CHANGE VENUE

v.

14

ANNAMARIE ESQUERRA,

15

et al.,

Defendant.

(Doc. No. 11)
ORDER TRANSFERING CASE TO
SACRAMENTO DIVISION

16
17

Plaintiff, a prisoner, is proceeding pro se and in forma pauperis on his Second Amended

18

Complaint filed on September 1, 2022. (Doc. No. 9). Pending before the Court is Plaintiff’s

19

motion to change venue filed December 9, 2022. (Doc. No. 11). Plaintiff requests the Court

20

transfer this action to the Sacramento Division of this Court because the events complained of in

21

Second Amended Complaint took place in Amador County, the Defendant resides in Stockton,

22

and all witnesses are in Ione, California. (Id. at 1-2).

23

Title 28 U.S.C. § 1391(b) provides venue is appropriate where any defendant resides,

24

where a substantial part of the events or omissions giving raise to the claim occurred, or any

25

district in which a defendant is subject to the personal jurisdiction of the court with respect to the

26

action. Id.; see also Ziegler v. Indian River County, 64 F.3d 470, 474 (9th Cir. 1995) (reviewing

27

federal court jurisdiction and venue in a § 1983 action). While Plaintiff’s initial complaint and

28

first amended complaint (“FAC”) alleged a substantial part of the events that gave rise to his

Case 2:22-cv-02204-DB Document 13 Filed 12/13/22 Page 2 of 2
1

claims occurred at California State Prison – Corcoran, a substantial part of the events that gave

2

rise to his Second Amended Complaint, the operative complaint, occurred at Mule Creek State

3

Prison. (See Doc. Nos. 1, 3, 9). Because the events giving rise to the cause of action occurred at

4

Mule Creek state Prison, which is located in Amador County, this action should be transferred to

5

the Sacramento Division of this Court. See 28 U.S.C. § 1391(b); see also Ziegler v. Indian River

6

County, 64 F.3d 470, 474 (9th Cir. 1995) (reviewing federal court jurisdiction and venue in a §

7

1983 action). Pursuant to Local Rule 120(f), a civil action which has not been commenced in the

8

proper court may, on the motion of any party, be transferred to the correct court. The Court finds

9

it in the interests of justice to transfer this case to the Sacramento Division under 28 U.S.C. §

10

1406(a) and Local Rule 120(f).

11

Accordingly, it is ORDERED:

12

1.

13

the Clerk of Court is directed to transfer this action to the Sacramento Division of this Court.
2.

14
15

Plaintiff’s motion for change of venue (Doc. No. 11) is GRANTED to the extent

All future filings shall refer to the new Sacramento case number assigned and shall

be mailed for filing to:

16

United States District Court
Eastern District of California
501 "I" Street, Suite 4-200
Sacramento, CA 95814

17
18
19
20
21

Dated:

December 12, 2022
HELENA M. BARCH-KUCHTA
UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE

22
23
24
25
26
27
28
2