Loudenslager v. Local #131 Plumbers-Steamfitters

Filing 17

///ORDER approving 14 Report and Recommendation; denying 16 Motion to Move Cases; granting 8 Motion to Dismiss for Failure to State a Claim. So Ordered by Judge Landya B. McCafferty.(js)

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
DISTRICT OF NEW HAMPSHIRE
Bruce Loudenslager
v.

Civil No. 17-cv-698-LM

Local #131 Plumbers-Steamfitters

O R D E R
Bruce Loudenslager, appearing pro se, sued Local # 131 of
the Plumbers and Steamfitters Union, alleging, among other
things, that various union officials are liable for embezzling
union funds, and for several forms of criminal activity including
torture and murder.

Defendant filed a motion to dismiss (doc.

no. 8), which was referred to Magistrate Judge Andrea K.
Johnstone.

On April 24, 2018, the Magistrate Judge issued a

Report a Recommendation, recommending that this court grant
defendant’s motion to dismiss.
Plaintiff filed an objection dated April 30, 2018 to the
Report and Recommendation (doc. no. 15).

He also filed a “motion

to move cases,” dated April 30, 2018, which states as follows:
I am requesting to the Concord, N.H. District Court
that all of my present cases (4) being reviewed and
worked on be moved as soon as possible to the
Asheville, N.C. District court to be decided there and
no further activity be used on my cases in Concord,
N.H. District Court.

1

Doc. no. 16 at 1.1

The court construes document no. 16 as a

motion to transfer venue.
I.

Motion to Transfer Venue
“For the convenience of parties and witnesses, in the

interest of justice, a district court may transfer any civil
action to any other district or division where it might have been
brought or to any district or division to which all parties have
consented.”

28 U.S.C. § 1404(a).

“District courts have broad

power to transfer cases, and in doing so, must weigh both private
and public interests.”

Garcia-Tatupu v. Bert Bell/Peter Rozelle

NFL Player Ret. Plan, 249 F. Supp. 3d 570, 576 (D. Mass. 2017).
Private interests include: relative ease of access to
sources of proof, availability of compulsory process,
comparative trial cost, and ability to enforce a
judgment. Public interests include: practical
difficulties of unnecessarily imposing upon a busy
court (or citizens called to jury duty), the
obligation to hear a case more fairly adjudicated
elsewhere, and having a judge more familiar with
relevant law make the requisite legal determinations.
Id. (internal citations omitted).

“The burden of proof upon a

motion to transfer venue rests with the party seeking to transfer
the action to another jurisdiction.”

Shelton Bros. v. Aleph

Wines Corp., No. 3:13-CV-30180-MAP, 2014 WL 4656635, at *10

Including the instant case, Loudenslager has four active
cases in the District of New Hampshire.
1

2

(D. Mass. July 21, 2014), report and recommendation adopted, No.
CA 13-30180-MAP, 2014 WL 4657109 (D. Mass. Sept. 10, 2014).
Plaintiff, who instituted this action in the District of New
Hampshire, has not shown that he could have properly brought this
action in North Carolina, and defendant has not consented to a
transfer of venue.

Nor has plaintiff shown that any private or

public interest weighs in favor of transferring venue,
particularly in light of the procedural posture of this case.
Therefore, plaintiff’s “motion to move cases” (doc. no. 16) is
denied.
II.

Report and Recommendation
After due consideration of the objection filed, I herewith

approve the Report and Recommendation of Magistrate Judge Andrea
K. Johnstone dated April 24, 2018, and grant defendant’s motion
to dismiss, (doc. no. 8), and the clerk of court is directed to
close this case.
SO ORDERED.
____________________________
Landya B. McCafferty
United States District Judge
May 21, 2018
cc: Bruce Loudenslager, pro se
Robert M. Cheverie, Esq.
James A.W. Shaw, Esq.
3