Chance v. Oklahoma Department of Corrections et al

Filing 10

ORDER ADOPTING REPORT AND RECOMMENDATION #8 , GRANTING #9 Plaintiff's Motion to Waive Objection, and TRRANSFERRING this action to the U.S. District Court for the Eastern District of Oklahoma (as more fully set out). Signed by Honorable Patrick R Wyrick on 10/15/2020. (ks)

Case 5:20-cv-00831-PRW Document 10 Filed 10/15/20 Page 1 of 3

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
FOR THE WESTERN DISTRICT OF OKLAHOMA

RONNIE CHANCE,

)
)
Plaintiff,
)
)
v.
)
)
OKLAHOMA DEPARTMENT OF
)
CORRECTIONS; JARRED ROBERTS, in )
his individual capacity; STARLA
)
PHILLIPS, in her individual capacity; and )
SHARON MCCOY, in her individual
)
capacity,
)
)
Defendants.
)

Case No. CIV-20-00831-PRW

ORDER
On September 28, 2020, U.S. Magistrate Judge Shon T. Erwin issued a Report and
Recommendation (Dkt. 8) in this action, recommending that the case be transferred to the
U.S. District Court for the Eastern District of Oklahoma pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1404(a)
because such transfer would better serve the interests of justice. According to the
Magistrate Judge, Plaintiff alleges that three employees of the Jess Dunn Correctional
Center in Muskogee County, Oklahoma—i.e., Defendants Jarred Roberts, Starla Phillips,
and Sharon McCoy—violated his First and Eighth Amendment rights while he was
incarcerated there. Thus, venue would be proper in the U.S. District Court for the Eastern
District of Oklahoma, which is located in Muskogee County, because “a substantial part of

1

Case 5:20-cv-00831-PRW Document 10 Filed 10/15/20 Page 2 of 3

the events or omissions giving rise to the claim occurred” in that judicial district. 1 Further,
even if venue is also proper here, venue should be transferred there “[f]or the convenience
of parties and witnesses, in the interest of justice.” 2
Plaintiff was advised of his right to object to the Report and Recommendation (Dkt.
8) by October 15, 2020, and that failure to make a timely objection would waive any right
to appellate review of the recommended ruling. On October 13th, Defendant filed a Motion
to Waive Objection (Dkt. 9), advising that he “waives his objection for the transfer of Case
No: CIV-20-831-PRW from the Western District to the Eastern District of Oklahoma.” 3
Accordingly, Plaintiff has waived his right to appellate review regarding transfer of venue.
Having reviewed this matter de novo, 4 the Court agrees with the Magistrate Judge
that Plaintiff’s action should be transferred to the U.S. District Court for the Eastern District
of Oklahoma pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1404(a). As the basis for this conclusion, the Court
adopts the analysis contained in the Report and Recommendation (Dkt. 8).
Accordingly, the Court:
(1)

GRANTS Plaintiff’s Motion to Waive Objection (Dkt. 9);

(2)

ADOPTS the Report and Recommendation (Dkt. 8) issued by
the Magistrate Judge on September 28, 2020; and

1

28 U.S.C. § 1391(b)(2) (2012).

2

Id. § 1404(a).

3

Pl.’s Mot. to Waive Obj. (Dkt. 9) at 1.

4

28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1) (requiring a district judge to “make a de novo determination of
those portions of the report or specified proposed findings or recommendations to which
objection is made” but otherwise permitting a district judge to review the report and
recommendations under any standard it deems appropriate).
2

Case 5:20-cv-00831-PRW Document 10 Filed 10/15/20 Page 3 of 3

(2)

TRANSFERS this action to the U.S. District Court for the Eastern
District of Oklahoma pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1404(a).

IT IS SO ORDERED this 15th day of October, 2020.

3