Source: s3://data.kl3m.ai/documents/govinfo/USCOURTS/USCOURTS-casd-3_06-cv-01978/USCOURTS-casd-3_06-cv-01978-0/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

K:\COMMON\EVERYONE\_EFILE-PROSE\DMS\06-1978-trf.wpd 1 06cv1978

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

BISHOP ELLERY SHAW,

CDC #J-43461,

Civil No. 06-1978 DMS (POR)

Plaintiff, ORDER TRANSFERRING CIVIL

ACTION FOR LACK OF PROPER

VENUE TO THE CENTRAL

DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA,

EASTERN DIVISION PURSUANT 

TO 28 U.S.C. § 84(c)(1), 

28 U.S.C. § 1391(b) 

AND 28 U.S.C. § 1406(a)

 vs.

M. BUNTS, et al.,

Defendants.

Plaintiff, a prisoner currently incarcerated at the Chuckawalla Valley State Prison in Blythe,

California, filed a civil rights Complaint pursuant to 42 U.S.C. § 1983 in this Court on September

18, 2006. Plaintiff claims that his constitutional rights have been violated by Chuckawalla prison

officials. (Compl. at 1.)

Plaintiff did not prepay the $350 civil filing fee mandated by 28 U.S.C. § 1914(a); instead

Plaintiff has filed a Motion to Proceed In Forma Pauperis (“IFP”) pursuant to 28 U.S.C.

§ 1915(a) [Doc. No. 2].

/ / /

/ / / 

/ / / 

/ / / 

Case 3:06-cv-01978-DMS-POR Document 3 Filed 09/27/06 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

K:\COMMON\EVERYONE\_EFILE-PROSE\DMS\06-1978-trf.wpd 2 06cv1978

I. 

Lack of Proper Venue

Upon initial review of the Complaint, the Court finds that Plaintiff’s case lacks proper

venue. Venue may be raised by a court sua sponte where the defendant has not yet filed a

responsive pleading and the time for doing so has not run. Costlow v. Weeks, 790 F.2d 1486,

1488 (9th Cir. 1986). “A civil action wherein jurisdiction is not founded solely on diversity of

citizenship may, except as otherwise provided by law, be brought only in (1) a judicial district

where any defendant resides, if all defendants reside in the same State, (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) a judicial district in

which any defendant may be found, if there is no district in which the action may otherwise be

brought.” 28 U.S.C. § 1391(b); Costlow, 790 F.2d at 1488; Decker Coal Co. v. Commonwealth

Edison Co., 805 F.2d 834, 842 (9th Cir. 1986). “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 interests of

justice, transfer such case to any district in or division in which it could have been brought.” 28

U.S.C. § 1406(a).

Here, Plaintiff claims constitutional violations originally arising out of events which

occurred in Riverside and Sacramento Counties, not San Diego or Imperial Counties. Moreover,

no Defendants are alleged to reside in San Diego or Imperial Counties. Therefore, venue is proper

in either the Central District of California, Eastern Division, pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 84(c)(1) or

the Eastern District pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 84(b), but not in the Southern District of California.

See 28 U.S.C. § 1391(b); Costlow, 790 F.2d at 1488.

/ / /

/ / /

/ / /

/ / /

/ / / 

/ / /

Case 3:06-cv-01978-DMS-POR Document 3 Filed 09/27/06 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

1

 Because the Court finds transfer appropriate, it expresses no opinion and defers ruling on

Plaintiff’s pending Motion to Proceed IFP [Doc. No. 2] to the Central District.

K:\COMMON\EVERYONE\_EFILE-PROSE\DMS\06-1978-trf.wpd 3 06cv1978

II. 

Conclusion and Order

Accordingly, IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that the Clerk of the Court shall transfer this

case for lack of proper venue, in the interests of justice and for the convenience of all parties, to

the docket of the United States District Court for the Central District of California, Eastern

Division, pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 84(c)(1), 28 U.S.C. § 1391(b) and 28 U.S.C. § 1406(a).1

DATED: September 27, 2006

HON. DANA M. SABRAW

United States District Judge

Case 3:06-cv-01978-DMS-POR Document 3 Filed 09/27/06 Page 3 of 3