Juste v. Martinez et al

Filing 9

ORDER DISMISSING CASE. Signed by Judge William Alsup on 5/4/17. (Attachments: # 1 Certificate/Proof of Service)(dl, COURT STAFF) (Filed on 5/4/2017)

Download PDF
1 2 3 4 5 IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 6 FOR THE NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA 7 8 ANDRE JUSTE, No. C 16-7399 WHA (PR) 9 Plaintiff, ORDER OF DISMISSAL 10 For the Northern District of California United States District Court vs. 11 12 13 14 15 FEDERAL BUREAU OF INVESTIGATION MARTINSBURG RESIDENT AGENCY; FEDERAL BUREAU OF INVESTIGATION PITTSBURGH BRANCH; JAMES COMEY; LORETTA E. LYNCH; ASHTON CARTER; JAMES COLLINS; BARACK OBAMA; AGENT MARTINEZ, 16 Defendants. 17 / 18 Plaintiff is a federal prisoner in the Buffalo Federal Detention Facility. He filed this 19 civil action against the former President of the United States, current and former federal law 20 enforcement officials, and two offices of the Federal Bureau of Investigation. He alleges that 21 they violated his civil rights while pursuing and prosecuting criminal charges against him in 22 West Virginia and Washington, D.C.. 23 Venue generally is proper in a judicial district in which: (1) any defendant resides, if all 24 defendants are residents of the state in which the district is located; (2) a substantial part of the 25 events or omissions giving rise to the claim occurred, or a substantial part of property that is the 26 subject of the action is situated; or (3) any defendant is subject to the court’s personal 27 jurisdiction, if there is no district in which the action may otherwise be brought. 28 U.S.C. § 28 1 1391(b). This district is the wrong venue because no defendant resides or is located in this 2 district or this state, none of the events or omissions giving rise to the claim or any property that 3 is the subject of this action is situated in this district, and this action may be brought in one of 4 the districts where the alleged violation of his civil rights took place. 5 Where, as here, a case is filed in the wrong venue, the district court has the discretion 6 either to dismiss the case or transfer it to the proper federal court "in the interest of justice." See 7 28 U.S.C. § 1406(a). As the allegations in the complaint are not comprehensible and do not 8 appear to form the basis of cognizable civil rights claims against the federal government or its 9 officials, in the interests of justice, the case is DISMISSED without prejudice to refiling in a federal judicial district with venue of the claims under Section 1391. 11 For the Northern District of California United States District Court 10 The clerk shall enter judgment and close the file. 12 IT IS SO ORDERED. 13 Dated: May 14 4 , 2017. WILLIAM ALSUP UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE 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?