Source: s3://data.kl3m.ai/documents/govinfo/USCOURTS/USCOURTS-caed-1_16-cv-01813/USCOURTS-caed-1_16-cv-01813-0/pdf.json

Nature of Suit Code: 550
Nature of Suit: Prisoner - Civil Rights (U.S. defendant)
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

CENTRAL DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

MICHAEL GONZALES, ) NO. CV 16-7604-CAS(E)

)

Plaintiff, )

)

v. ) ORDER TO SHOW CAUSE

)

FERRSO, et al., ) 

)

Defendants. )

______________________________)

Plaintiff, a state prisoner incarcerated at the California

Correctional Institution at Tehachapi, California (“CCI”), filed this

civil rights action pursuant to 42 U.S.C. section 1983 on October 12,

2016. Defendants are CCI prison officials. Plaintiff alleges that

various Defendants assaulted Plaintiff, placed drugs in Plaintiff’s

meals, interfered with Plaintiff’s legal mail and hindered Plaintiff’s

ability to file grievances. Although Plaintiff sues only CCI

officials, attachments to the Complaint suggest that Plaintiff also

may intend to assert claims against prison officials at the Corcoran

State Prison.

///

Case 1:16-cv-01813-DAD-EPG Document 5 Filed 10/18/16 Page 1 of 3
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

The California Correctional Institution at Tehachapi, California,

is located in Kern County, within the Eastern District of California. 

See Nava c. Gonzales, 2010 WL 796757, at *2 & n.2 (E.D. Cal. Mar. 5,

2010); 28 U.S.C. § 84(b). The Corcoran State Prison is located in

Kings County, California, also within the Eastern District of

California. See Fisher v. Brown, 2014 WL 109497, at *1 (E.D. Cal.

Jan. 10, 2014).

Section 1391(b) of Title 28, United States Code, provides:

A civil action may be brought in -- 

(1) a judicial district in which any defendant resides, if

all defendants are residents of the State in which the

district is located;

(2) a judicial district in which a substantial part of the

events or omissions giving rise to the claim occurred, or a

substantial part of property that is the subject of the

action is situated; or

(3) if there is no district in which an action may otherwise

be brought as provided in this section, any judicial

district in which any defendant is subject to the court's

personal jurisdiction with respect to such action.

Here, it appears that all Defendants reside in the Eastern

District of California, and that the events or omissions giving rise

2

Case 1:16-cv-01813-DAD-EPG Document 5 Filed 10/18/16 Page 2 of 3
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

to Plaintiff’s purported claims allegedly occurred within the Eastern

District of California.

Section 1406(a) of Title 28, United States Code, provides:

The district court of a district in which is filed a

case laying venue in the wrong division or district

shall dismiss, or if it be in the interest of justice,

transfer such case to any district or division in which

it could have been brought.

This Court has the power to decide the venue issue on its own

motion and to dismiss or transfer the action before a responsive

pleading is filed. See Costlow v. Weeks, 790 F.2d 1486, 1488 (9th

Cir. 1986).

Within thirty (30) days of the date of this Order, the parties

shall show cause in writing, if there be any, why this action should

not be transferred to the United States District Court for the Eastern

District of California on the ground that venue is improper in the

Central District of California. Failure timely to respond to this

Order to Show Cause may result in the transfer of the action.

DATED: October 18, 2016.

 /s/ 

 CHARLES F. EICK

 UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE

3

Case 1:16-cv-01813-DAD-EPG Document 5 Filed 10/18/16 Page 3 of 3