Konrath v. Los Angeles Police Dept., The
Filing
3
ORDER DISMISSING CASE. Court dismisses this action sua sponte without prejudice based on Plaintiff's failure to pay the $400 filing fee required by 28 USC 1914(a), failure to file a Motion for IFP pursuant to 28 USC 1915(a), and for lack of proper venue pursuant to 28 USC 1391(b) and 1406(a). Signed by Judge Cynthia Bashant on 4/19/2017 (All non-registered users served via U.S. Mail Service) (jah)
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA
10
11
12
GREGORY KONRATH,
Inmate #254068,
15
ORDER DISMISSING CIVIL
ACTION:
Plaintiff,
13
14
Case No.: 3:17-cv-00345-BAS-PCL
vs.
1) FOR FAILING TO PAY
FILING FEE REQUIRED
BY 28 U.S.C. § 1914(a) AND/OR
FAILING TO MOVE TO PROCEED
IN FORMA PAUPERIS
PURSUANT TO
28 U.S.C. § 1915(a)
LOS ANGELES POLICE DEPT.,
Defendant.
16
17
18
19
AND
20
21
2) FOR LACK OF PROPER VENUE
PURSUANT TO 28 U.S.C. § 1391(b)
AND § 1406(a)
22
23
24
Plaintiff, a prisoner currently incarcerated at Westville Correctional Facility in
25
Westville, Indiana, and proceeding pro se, has filed a civil rights complaint pursuant to 42
26
U.S.C. § 1983. (ECF No. 1.) Plaintiff seeks to sue the Los Angeles Police Department, on
27
behalf of the estate of his late brother, for using excessive force while effecting his brother’s
28
arrest in 1994. (Id. at 1-2.)
1
17cv0345
1
I.
Failure to Pay Filing Fee or Request IFP Status
2
All parties instituting any civil action, suit, or proceeding in a district court of the
3
United States, except an application for writ of habeas corpus, must pay a filing fee of
4
$400. See 28 U.S.C. § 1914(a).1 An action may proceed despite a plaintiff’s failure to
5
prepay the entire fee only if he is granted leave to proceed IFP pursuant to 28 U.S.C.
6
§ 1915(a). See Andrews v. Cervantes, 493 F.3d 1047, 1051 (9th Cir. 2007); Rodriguez v.
7
Cook, 169 F.3d 1176, 1177 (9th Cir. 1999). However, if the plaintiff is a prisoner, as
8
Plaintiff is here, even if he is granted leave to commence his suit IFP, he will remain
9
obligated to pay the entire filing fee in “increments,” see Williams v. Paramo, 775 F.3d
10
1182, 1185 (9th Cir. 2015), regardless of whether his case is ultimately dismissed. See 28
11
U.S.C. § 1915(b)(1) & (2); Taylor v. Delatoore, 281 F.3d 844, 847 (9th Cir. 2002).
12
Plaintiff has not prepaid the $400 in filing and administrative fees required to
13
commence this civil action and he has not filed a Motion to Proceed IFP which complies
14
with 28 U.S.C. § 1915(a)(1) and (2). Therefore, his case cannot yet proceed. See 28 U.S.C.
15
§ 1914(a); Andrews, 493 F.3d at 1051.
16
II.
Venue
17
While the Court would normally grant Plaintiff an opportunity to either pay the full
18
filing fee or file a Motion to Proceed IFP, an initial review of his Complaint further reveals
19
that, among other pleading deficiencies, he has filed his case in the wrong district. Venue
20
may be raised by a court sua sponte where the defendant has not yet filed a responsive
21
pleading and the time for doing so has not run. Costlow v. Weeks, 790 F.2d 1486, 1488 (9th
22
Cir. 1986).
23
Section 1391(b) of Title 28 of the U.S. Code provides, in pertinent part, that a “civil
24
action may be brought in – (1) a judicial district in which any defendant resides, if all
25
26
27
28
1
In addition to the $350 statutory fee, civil litigants must pay an additional administrative
fee of $50. See 28 U.S.C. § 1914(a) (Judicial Conference Schedule of Fees, District Court
Misc. Fee Schedule, § 14 (eff. Dec. 1, 2014). The additional $50 administrative fee does
not apply to persons granted leave to proceed IFP. Id.
2
17cv0345
1
defendants are residents of the State in which the district is located; [or] (2) a judicial
2
district in which a substantial part of the events or omissions giving rise to the claim
3
occurred, or a substantial part of property that is the subject of the action is situated[.]” 28
4
U.S.C. § 1391(b); see also Costlow, 790 F.2d at 1488; Decker Coal Co. v. Commonwealth
5
Edison Co., 805 F.2d 834, 842 (9th Cir. 1986). “The district court of a district in which is
6
filed a case laying venue in the wrong division or district shall dismiss, or if it be in the
7
interests of justice, transfer such case to any district or division in which it could have been
8
brought.” 28 U.S.C. § 1406(a).
9
Plaintiff is currently incarcerated in Indiana, and he seeks to sue the Los Angeles
10
Police Department based on an incident occurring in a Los Angeles hair salon in 1994.
11
(ECF No. 1 at 1.) The City of Los Angeles is located in the County of Los Angeles,
12
California, and it is within the Central District of California, Western Division. 28 U.S.C.
13
§ 84(c)(2). Thus, no claim is alleged to have arisen in, and no Defendant is alleged to reside
14
in, this district—the Southern District of California. See 28 U.S.C. § 84(d). Consequently,
15
the Court finds dismissal of the action without prejudice based on a lack of proper venue
16
is also appropriate. See 28 U.S.C. § 1406(a).
17
III.
Conclusion and Order
18
Accordingly, the Court DISMISSES this action sua sponte without prejudice based
19
on Plaintiff’s failure to pay the $400 filing fee required by 28 U.S.C. § 1914(a), his failure
20
to file a Motion to Proceed IFP pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1915(a), and for lack of proper
21
venue pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1391(b) and § 1406(a).
22
IT IS SO ORDERED.
23
24
25
26
Dated: April 19, 2017
Hon. Cynthia Bashant
United States District Judge
27
28
3
17cv0345
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?