Siddhar v. Prathap et al

Filing 12

ORDER denying 11 Motion for Reconsideration. This Court is without jurisdiction to consider the plaintiffs motion to reconsider. For the same reasons, the plaintiffs notice of voluntary dismissal of defendant Nareshkumar Chalimeda is without effect. The plaintiff is ORDERED to make no further filings in this case in this Court.FURTHER, the Court DIRECTS the Clerk to send a copy of this order to the Northern District of Georgia. Signed by Judge David R. Herndon on 3/7/2016. (dsw)

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
FOR THE SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF ILLINOIS
SWAMIJI SRI SELVAM SIDDHAR
also known as
Annamalia Annamalai
also known as
Dr Commander Selvam,
Plaintiff,
vs.

Case No. 16-cv-00183-DRH

Suganya Prathap
Vijayal Gopalakrishnan
Kirupakaran Puvalai
Gopalakrishnan Paramasivam
Seema Patel
Harshad Rami
Nareshkumar Chalimeda
Sireesha Iruvuri
John Does 1-10
Defendants.
MEMORANDUM AND ORDER
HERNDON, District Judge:
This matter is before the Court on the Motion for Reconsideration of this
Court’s Order transferring the above captioned action to the Northern District of
Georgia (Doc. 11) brought by plaintiff. By Order entered February 25, 2016, the

Court transferred this case to the United States District Court for Northern
District of Georgia pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1406(a). The electronic docket of the
United States District Court for the Northern District of Georgia shows that,
effective February 26, 2016, the complete file in this case has been transferred to
that court. See Siddhar v. Prathap et al., No. 1:16-00603-TWT-CMS. On March
3, 2016, the Northern District of Georgia issued a Show Cause Order directing the
plaintiff to show cause “why (A) this case should not be dismissed as having been
filed in violation of the Judgment and Commitment in the Criminal Case and (B)
he should not be sanctioned for such violation.” See Siddhar v. Prathap et al.,
No. 1:16-00603-TWT-CMS Doc. 9. On that same day, the plaintiff filed a notice of
voluntary dismissal. See Siddhar v. Prathap et al., No. 1:16-00603-TWT-CMS
Doc. 10.
Generally, when an action is transferred, “and the papers lodged with the
clerk of the transferee court, it is well settled that the transferor court—and the
appellate court that has jurisdiction over it—loses all jurisdiction over the case
and may not proceed further with regard to it.” 15 Charles A. Wright, Arthur R.
Miller & Edward H. Cooper, Federal Practice & Procedure § 3846 (3d ed. 1998 &
Supp.2006) (collecting cases). See also Jones v. InfoCure Corp., 310 F.3d 529,
533 (7th Cir. 2002); Robbins v. Pocket Beverage Co., 779 F.2d 351, 355–56 (7th
Cir. 1985); A.C. Nielsen Co. v. Hoffman, 270 F.2d 693, 695 (7th Cir. 1959). More
over, in the instant case, the Northern District of Georgia has asserted jurisdiction
by issuing a show cause order and the plaintiff, by filing a voluntary motion to

dismiss in the Northern District of Georgia, has asked the Northern District of
Georgia to exercise jurisdiction. See Robbins v. Pocket Beverage Co., 779 F.2d
351, 355–56 (7th Cir. 1985) (identifying factors relevant to assessing jurisdiction
after a transfer).
Accordingly, this Court is without jurisdiction to consider the plaintiff’s
motion to reconsider. For the same reasons, the plaintiff’s notice of voluntary
dismissal of defendant Nareshkumar Chalimeda is without effect.
The plaintiff is ORDERED to make no further filings in this case in this
Court.
FURTHER, the Court DIRECTS the Clerk to send a copy of this order to
the Northern District of Georgia.
IT IS SO ORDERED.
Signed this 7th day of March, 2016.

Digitally signed by
Judge David R.
Herndon
Date: 2016.03.07
15:48:54 -06'00'
United States District Court