Olivera v. Cate et al

Filing 12

ORDER signed by Magistrate Judge Carolyn K. Delaney on 2/20/2014 ORDERING that this action is TRANSFERRED to the USDC for the Western District of Oklahoma. CASE CLOSED. (Yin, K) [Transferred from California Eastern on 2/21/2014.]

Download PDF
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 9 FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA 10 11 ANGEL OLIVERA, 12 13 14 15 No. 2:13-cv-2376 CKD P Plaintiff, v. ORDER MATTHEW CATE, et al., Defendants. 16 17 Plaintiff , a state prisoner proceeding pro se, has filed a civil rights action pursuant to 42 18 U.S.C. § 1983. Since May 2012, plaintiff has been housed at the North Fork Correctional Facility 19 (NFCF) in Sayre, Oklahoma. (ECF No. 1 at 13.) His complaint alleges that, after arriving at 20 NFCF, he was placed on lockdown and denied all normal programs for five months, while 21 inmates of other races (plaintiff is Southern Hispanic) were not subject to the lockdown. (Id. at 22 14-15.) Plaintiff names as defendants four high-level CDCR officials, including Secretary 23 Matthew Cate, and seven officials at NFCF. 24 The federal venue statute provides that a civil action “may be brought in (1) a judicial 25 district in which any defendant resides, if all defendants are residents of the State in which the 26 district is located, (2) a judicial district in which a substantial part of the events or omissions 27 giving rise to the claim occurred, or a substantial part of property that is the subject of the action 28 is situated, or (3) if there is no district in which an action may otherwise be brought as provided in 1 1 this action, any judicial district in which any defendant is subject to the court’s personal 2 jurisdiction with respect to such action.” 28 U.S.C. § 1391(b). 3 Venue of this action is technically appropriate in the Eastern District of California because 4 the Director of the California Department of Corrections and Rehabilitation (hereafter “CDCR 5 Director”) resides in this district. Nevertheless, the court is transferring this action to Western 6 District of Oklahoma pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1404(a) in the interests of justice for the following 7 reasons. 8 It is clear that plaintiff is suing the CDCR officials solely in a respondeat superior 9 capacity. Additionally, plaintiff is seeking monetary damages only and has not stated a claim for 10 injunctive relief. As such, the CDCR defendants are subject to be dismissed from this 42 U.S.C. 11 § 1983 action. See Fayle v. Stapley, 607 F.2d 858, 862 (9th Cir. 1979). Venue would then be 12 improper in this district because no defendant would be found here. Venue would also be 13 improper because the claims for which plaintiff seeks relief took place in the Western District of 14 Oklahoma. Thus, it is appropriate that those claims be litigated in that district. 15 IT IS THEREFORE ORDERED that this action is transferred to the Western District of 16 Oklahoma. 17 Dated: February 20, 2014 18 19 2/oliv2376.21c _____________________________________ CAROLYN K. DELANEY UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 2

Disclaimer: Justia Dockets & Filings provides public litigation records from the federal appellate and district courts. These filings and docket sheets should not be considered findings of fact or liability, nor do they necessarily reflect the view of Justia.

Why Is My Information Online?