Source: s3://data.kl3m.ai/documents/govinfo/USCOURTS/USCOURTS-caed-1_15-cv-00121/USCOURTS-caed-1_15-cv-00121-0/pdf.json

Nature of Suit Code: 560
Nature of Suit: Prisoner Petitions - Civil Detainee - Conditions of Confinement
Cause of Action: 42:1983 Prisoner Civil Rights

---

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25

26

27

28

United States District Court

For the Northern District of California

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

FOR THE NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

KENDYL WELCH,

Plaintiff.

 v.

CLIFF ALLENBY, et al.,

Defendants.

 /

No C-14-5223 TEH (PR)

ORDER OF TRANSFER

Plaintiff is a civil detainee at the Coalinga State

Hospital ("Coalinga") proceeding pro se. He is detained pursuant to

California's Sexually Violent Predator Act ("SVPA"). He has filed a

complaint under 42 U.S.C. § 1983, complaining about the conditions

of his confinement at Coalinga. Defendants are officials of

Coalinga and of the California Department of Corrections and

Rehabilitation in Sacramento. Both Coalinga and Sacramento lie

within the venue of the United States District Court for the Eastern

District of California. Venue for this case is therefore proper in

the Eastern District. See 28 U.S.C. § 1391. 

Petitioner also complains about the validity of his

assessment as a sexually violent predator under the SVPA, which

Case 1:15-cv-00121-LJO-MJS Document 8 Filed 01/21/15 Page 1 of 2
1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25

26

27

28 G:\PRO-SE\TEH\CR.14\Welch 14-5223 Transfer.wpd 2

assessment took place in San Francisco County. Challenges to the

assessment itself are the province of a habeas petition, not a civil

rights action, because they implicate the validity of his detention. 

See Hill v. McDonough, 547 U.S. 573, 579 (2006) (challenges to the

lawfulness of confinement or to particulars affecting its duration

are the province of habeas corpus); Nelson v. Sandritter, 351 F.2d

284, 285 (9th Cir. 1965) (constitutionality of state civil

commitment proceedings are challenged in federal habeas corpus once

state remedies have been exhausted). Plaintiff may challenge the

validity of his assessment in this court, but he must do so by way

of a habeas petition filed in a separate action from the instant

civil rights case, after exhausting state judicial remedies. 

Accordingly, and in the interests of justice, this case is

TRANSFERRED to the United States District Court for the Eastern

District of California. See 28 U.S.C. 1404(a), 1406(a). In light

of this transfer, the pending motion (dkt. 3) to proceed in forma

pauperis is deferred to the Eastern District.

The Clerk shall transfer this matter, terminate all

pending motions as moot and close the file. 

IT IS SO ORDERED.

DATED 01/21/2015 

THELTON E. HENDERSON

United States District Judge

Case 1:15-cv-00121-LJO-MJS Document 8 Filed 01/21/15 Page 2 of 2