Jenkins v. Trammell et al

Filing 32

ORDER ADOPTING REPORT AND RECOMMENDATION 23 report and recommendation of Magistrate Judge Charles B. Goodwin...this case is TRANSFERRED to the U.S. District Court for the Eastern District of Oklahoma for further proceedings. Signed by Honorable Joe Heaton on 03/22/2016. (lam) [Transferred from okwd on 3/22/2016.]

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE
WESTERN DISTRICT OF OKLAHOMA
TEDDY RAY JENKINS,
Petitioner,
vs.
ANITA TRAMMELL, et al.,
Respondents,

)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)

NO. CIV-15-0793-HE

ORDER
Petitioner Teddy Ray Jenkins (“Jenkins”), a state prisoner appearing pro se and
proceeding in forma pauperis, filed a petition for extraordinary writ due to alleged violations
of his constitutional rights.1 Consistent with 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1)(B), this matter was
referred for initial proceedings to Magistrate Judge Charles B. Goodwin, who recommends
this case be transferred to the United States District Court for the Eastern District of
Oklahoma [Doc. No. 23 (“Report and Recommendation”)].
The Report and Recommendation included a notice of petitioner’s right to file an
objection by November 19, 2015. Jenkins sought, and was granted, an extension of time to
file his objection, which moved the deadline to January 4, 2016. After the deadline passed,
Jenkins filed another motion for extension of time to file his objection. The motion, dated
January 6, 2016, indicates the delay was caused by a failure to pick up Jenkins’s legal mail
on January 4 or January 5, 2016. Doc. No. 31, p. 1. The motion further states that Jenkins

1

Jenkins indicates throughout his various pleadings that he intends to add claims arising
under 42 U.S.C. § 1983 and add defendants located within the federal judicial district for the
Western District of Oklahoma. To date, however, he has not filed an amended complaint.

requests an extension of time to file an amended complaint which would show additional
facts sufficient to show that venue should remain in the Western District of Oklahoma.
These additional facts, which “go back to the 1970s–2016,” are purportedly related
to an alleged fraud conspiracy claimed to be taking place in the Western District, which has
some connection to Petitioner’s 2002 conviction for burglary and domestic abuse assault and
battery in Oklahoma County district court. In addition, Jenkins states that his factual records
in support of the additional allegations are being withheld from him and stored in the
Oklahoma Department of Corrections headquarters in Oklahoma City.
Petitioner’s complaint and the relief sought are directed to the alleged interference
with his possession and mailing of legal papers and his time spent in solitary confinement.
The conduct underlying his complaint and the defendants who allegedly participated in this
conduct are located in the Eastern District of Oklahoma. Although his motions indicate an
intent to compile additional claims and defendants to add to the suit, Jenkins has not filed an
amended complaint. Given the nature of the claims he has asserted, it would serve both the
convenience of the parties and the interest of justice for case to be transferred to the Eastern
District of Oklahoma pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1404(a).
Accordingly, the Report and Recommendation [Doc. No. 23] is ADOPTED and this
case is TRANSFERRED to the United States District Court for the Eastern District of
Oklahoma.

2

IT IS SO ORDERED.
Dated this 22nd day of March, 2016.

3