Source: s3://data.kl3m.ai/documents/govinfo/USCOURTS/USCOURTS-cand-3_20-cv-06053/USCOURTS-cand-3_20-cv-06053-0/pdf.json

Nature of Suit Code: 540
Nature of Suit: Prisoner Petitions - Mandamus and Other
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

Northern District of California

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

WILLIAM LEN RAINEY,

Plaintiff,

v.

SHARON KELLER, et al.,

Defendants.

Case No. 20-cv-06053-EMC 

ORDER OF DISMISSAL

William Len Rainey, an inmate at a state prison in Iowa Park, Texas, filed this pro se civil 

rights action under 42 U.S.C. § 1983 to complain about a Texas statute, the handling of a criminal 

case against him in Texas, and the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit’s handling of his 

habeas action challenging his Texas conviction. All of the Defendants appear to reside in Texas. 

The general venue statute provides that 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.” 28 U.S.C. § 1391. The Northern District of California 

fits none of those criteria: no defendant is alleged to reside in the Northern District of California; 

none of the events or omissions giving rise to the complaint are alleged to have occurred in the 

Northern District of California; and there is at least one district in Texas in which the action may 

be brought. Venue therefore is not proper in the Northern District of California.

Case 3:20-cv-06053-EMC Document 12 Filed 11/10/20 Page 1 of 2
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

United States District Court

Northern District of California

When an action is filed in the wrong venue, the district court “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.” 28 U.S.C.A. § 1406(a). A transfer is not in the interest of justice because there are four 

federal districts in Texas and there is not enough information in the record to determine which 

would be the proper district in which to file this action. Accordingly, this action is DISMISSED

because it was filed in the wrong venue. The dismissal is without prejudice to Plaintiff filing a 

new action in the proper venue, which would be one of the four federal districts in Texas. 

The Clerk shall close the file.

IT IS SO ORDERED.

Dated: November 10, 2020

______________________________________

EDWARD M. CHEN

United States District Judge

Case 3:20-cv-06053-EMC Document 12 Filed 11/10/20 Page 2 of 2