Arellano v. Bureau of Prisons et al

Filing 2

MEMORANDUM ORDER: IT IS ORDERED that the instant proceeding is TRANSFERRED to the United States District Court, Middle District of Pennsylvania. Signed by Magistrate Judge Karen L Hayes on 6/25/2018. (crt,Haik, K)

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
WESTERN DISTRICT OF LOUISIANA
SHREVEPORT DIVISION
FREDDY ARELLANO

CIVIL ACTION NO. 18-0781
SECTION P

VS.
JUDGE TERRY A. DOUGHTY
BUREAU OF PRISONS, ET AL.

MAG. JUDGE KAREN L. HAYES

MEMORANDUM ORDER
Plaintiff Freddy Arellano is incarcerated at the United States Penitentiary in Pollock,
Louisiana, and is proceeding pro se. He filed the instant Complaint on June 12, 2018, under
Bivens v. Six Unknown Named Agents of Fed. Bureau of Narcotics, 403 U.S. 388 (1971). He
names the following Defendants: Bureau of Prisons, David Ebbert, Kevin Pigon, Megan Shaw,
Andrew Edinger, and John Doe.
Plaintiff alleges that all Defendants work at the United States Penitentiary in Lewisburg,
Pennsylvania. He claims that, in December of 2016, at the United States Penitentiary in
Lewisburg, he was served food contaminated with salmonella, which caused him pain, suffering,
fever, bloody diarrhea, and dizziness. He also claims that certain Defendants failed to provide
adequate medical care. He seeks $20,000.00.
Venue in a Bivens action in which a plaintiff seeks monetary damages is governed by 28
U.S.C. § 1391(b),1 which provides that a civil action may be brought in: “(1) a judicial district in
which any defendant resides, if all defendants are residents of the State in which the district is
located; (2) a judicial district in which a substantial part of the events or omissions giving rise to

1

Stafford v. Briggs, 444 U.S. 527, 542–45 (1980).

the claim occurred, or a substantial part of 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 as provided in this section,
any judicial district in which any defendant is subject to the court’s personal jurisdiction with
respect to such action.”
Venue for this action is inappropriate in the Western District of Louisiana because, under
Plaintiff’s allegations, no Defendant resides in this judicial district and a substantial part of the
events or omissions giving rise to Plaintiff’s claims did not occur in this judicial district.
Moreover, there is a judicial district in which this action may otherwise be brought: a substantial
part of the alleged events or omissions giving rise to his claims allegedly occurred in Union
County, Pennsylvania. Thus, venue is appropriate there. The Middle District of Pennsylvania
embraces Union County. 28 U.S.C. § 118(b).
Accordingly, under 28 U.S.C. § 1406(a), IT IS ORDERED that the instant proceeding is
TRANSFERRED to the United States District Court, Middle District of Pennsylvania.
In Chambers, Monroe, Louisiana, this 25th day of June, 2018.

__________________________________
KAREN L. HAYES
UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE

2