Hicks v. Kate

Filing 3

ORDER OF TRANSFER (Illston, Susan) (Filed on 3/20/2012)

Download PDF
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 8 NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA 9 United States District Court For the Northern District of California 10 MICHAEL HICKS, 11 12 No. C 11-5794 SI (pr) Plaintiff, ORDER OF TRANSFER v. 13 MATTHEW KATE, Secretary of California Department 14 Of Corrections and Rehabilitation, 15 16 Defendant. / 17 18 Michael Hicks filed this civil rights action under 42 U.S.C. § 1983, complaining of events 19 and omissions that occurred at the California Men's Colony in San Luis Obispo, where he 20 previously was housed. That facility is in San Luis Obispo County, within the venue of the 21 Central District of California. The lone defendant apparently resides in the Eastern District of 22 California, but there are no allegations of any wrongdoing by that defendant. No defendant is 23 alleged to reside in, and none of the events or omissions giving rise to the complaint occurred 24 in, the Northern District. Venue therefore would be proper in the Central District and not in this 25 one. See 28 U.S.C. § 1391(b). The Central District (where the alleged wrongs occurred) is 26 preferable to the Eastern District (where the lone defendant apparently resides) for venue 27 because the defendant has not been linked to any claim and quite possibly will not remain as a 28 1 defendant. Accordingly, in the interest of justice and pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1406(a), this 2 action is TRANSFERRED to the United States District Court for the Central District of 3 California. The clerk shall transfer this matter. 4 5 IT IS SO ORDERED. Dated: March 20, 2012 ______________________ SUSAN ILLSTON United States District Judge 6 7 8 9 United States District Court For the Northern District of California 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?