Source: s3://data.kl3m.ai/documents/govinfo/USCOURTS/USCOURTS-caed-1_08-cv-01610/USCOURTS-caed-1_08-cv-01610-0/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

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

FOR THE NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

MARK ANTHONY COLEMAN, 

Plaintiff,

 vs.

WARDEN, WASCO STATE PRISON,

Defendant. 

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

No. C 08-4256 TEH (PR)

ORDER OF TRANSFER

(Docket No. 2)

Plaintiff, a prisoner of the State of California currently incarcerated at Wasco

State Prison in Wasco, California, has filed a pro se civil rights action alleging deliberate

indifference to his medical needs at the prison. The events or omissions giving rise to

the claims occurred, and the Defendant named apparently reside in Kern County, within

the venue of the Eastern District of California. See 28 U.S.C. § 84(b). Venue therefore

properly lies in that district. See id. § 1391(b).

When jurisdiction is not founded solely on diversity, venue is proper in the

district in which (1) any defendant resides, if all of the defendants reside in the same

state, (2) the 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). Where a

case is filed in the wrong venue, the district court has the discretion either to dismiss the

case or transfer it to the proper federal court “in the interest of justice.” 28 U.S.C. §

Case 1:08-cv-01610-DLB Document 4 Filed 09/15/08 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

1406(a). Venue may be raised by the 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). 

Accordingly, IT IS ORDERED that, in the interest of justice and pursuant to 28

U.S.C. § 1406(a), this action be TRANSFERRED to the United States District Court for

the Eastern District of California. In light of the transfer, this Court will not rule on

Plaintiff’s pending motion seeking to proceed in forma pauperis (docket no. 2). The

Clerk shall transfer this matter forthwith.

SO ORDERED. 

DATED: 09/15/08 

THELTON E. HENDERSON

United States District Judge

Case 1:08-cv-01610-DLB Document 4 Filed 09/15/08 Page 2 of 2