Source: s3://data.kl3m.ai/documents/govinfo/USCOURTS/USCOURTS-cand-3_18-cv-05236/USCOURTS-cand-3_18-cv-05236-0/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

EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

JOHN HISLE aka ARTHUR GRAVES aka 

PINK PANTHER,

Plaintiff,

v.

TODD BROCKMAN and WILLA HISLE 

O.D.,

Defendants.

_____________________________________/

Case No. 1:18-cv-01111-DAD-SKO

ORDER TRANSFERRING CASE

On August 17, 2018, Plaintiff John Hisle aka Arthur Graves aka Pink Panther, proceeding 

pro se, filed a complaint against Defendants Todd Brockman and Willa Hisle O.D., along with an 

application to proceed in forma pauperis. (Docs. 1 & 2.) The complaint purports to allege claims 

apparently arising from the filing of a false police report with the Monterey County Police 

Department and the withholding of mail sent to an address located in Monterey, California. (See

Doc. 1 at 2–4.) Plaintiff is presently incarcerated at the Fresno County Jail located in Fresno, 

California. (See id. at 1.)

Case 3:18-cv-05236-SI Document 3 Filed 08/22/18 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

2

The federal venue statute requires that a civil action, other than one based on diversity 

jurisdiction, be brought only 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.” 28 U.S.C. § 1391(b). In 

this case, neither of the defendants reside in this district—they reside in Monterey, California, which 

is within the Northern District of California. See 28 U.S.C. § 1391(b)(1). In addition, although 

Plaintiff was arrested and is imprisoned within the Eastern District of California, it appears a 

substantial part of the events or omissions giving rise to Plaintiff’s claims occurred in Monterey 

County, within the Northern District of California. See 28 U.S.C. § 1391(b)(2). Therefore, 

Plaintiff's lawsuit should have been filed in the United States District Court for the Northern District 

of California.

In the interest of justice, a federal court may transfer a complaint filed in the wrong district 

to the correct district. See 28 U.S.C. § 1406(a); Starnes v. McGuire, 512 F.2d 918, 932 (D.C. Cir. 

1974). Accordingly, IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that this matter is transferred to the United States 

District Court for the Northern District of California.

IT IS SO ORDERED.

Dated: August 21, 2018 /s/ Sheila K. Oberto .

UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE

Case 3:18-cv-05236-SI Document 3 Filed 08/22/18 Page 2 of 2