DALKE v. BAYLESS, ET AL.

Filing 4

ORDER TRANSFERRING CASE to Southern District of Indiana. Signed by District Judge Gerald E. Rosen. (SSch) [Transferred from Michigan Eastern on 10/16/2015.]

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
EASTERN DISTRICT OF MICHIGAN
SOUTHERN DIVISION

KIP DALKE,
Plaintiff,
Case No. 15-cv-13394
Honorable Gerald E. Rosen

v.
M. BAYLESS, D. CAMDEN,
MR. ALDRICH, MR. VAN GILDER,
and L. LARIVA,
Defendants.
__________________________________/

ORDER TRANSFERRING CASE TO THE SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF
INDIANA
This matter has come before the Court on plaintiff Kip Dalke’s pro se civil
rights complaint. Plaintiff is an inmate at the Federal Correctional Institution in
Milan, Michigan. The defendants are: M. Bayless, a discipline hearing officer at
the Federal Correctional Institution in Terre Haute, Indiana; L. LaRiva, the warden
at the Terre Haute prison; and three correctional officers employed at the Terre
Haute prison and identified as D. Camden, Mr. Aldrich, and Mr. Van Gilder.
The complaint concerns a disciplinary incident report that was issued against
Plaintiff in 2014. Plaintiff contends that prison officials violated a program
statement and prison policy when they charged him with misconduct and
investigated the incident. He seeks to have the disciplinary infraction expunged

from his file and all sanctions for the incident, including loss of good conduct time,
reversed.
A preliminary question is whether venue is proper in this District. The
proper venue in civil actions is the judicial district where (1) any defendant resides
if all the defendants are residents of the State in which the district is located, (2) a
substantial part of the events or omissions giving rise to the claim occurred or a
substantial part of the property that is the subject of the action is situated, or (3) if
there is no district in which an action may otherwise be brought, any judicial
district in which any defendant is subject to the court’s personal jurisdiction. 28
U.S.C. § 1391(b). Public officials sued in their official capacities “reside” in the
judicial district where they maintain their official residence or perform their
official duties. O’Neill v. Battisti, 472 F.2d 789, 791 (6th Cir. 1972). For the
convenience of parties and witnesses and in the interest of justice, a district court
may transfer a civil case to any district where it could have been brought. 28
U.S.C. §§ 1404(a) and 1406(a).
The events giving rise to Plaintiff’s claims occurred at the Federal
Correctional Institution in Terre Haute, Indiana where all the defendants are
employed. Terre Haute lies within the geographical confines of the Southern
District of Indiana. See 28 U.S.C. § 94(b)(2). The Court therefore concludes that

2

the Southern District of Indiana is the proper venue and more convenient forum for
this action. Accordingly,
IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that the Clerk of the Court shall transfer this
case to the Terre Haute Division of the Southern District of Indiana pursuant to 28
U.S.C. §§ 1391(b), 1404(a), and 1406(a). The Court has not determined whether
Plaintiff may proceed without prepayment of the fees and costs for this lawsuit.

Dated: October 14, 2015

s/Gerald E. Rosen
Chief Judge, United States District Court

I hereby certify that a copy of the foregoing document was served upon the parties
and/or counsel of record on October 14, 2015, by electronic and/or ordinary mail.
s/Julie Owens
Case Manager, [phone]

3