Source: s3://data.kl3m.ai/documents/govinfo/USCOURTS/USCOURTS-caed-2_23-cv-00954/USCOURTS-caed-2_23-cv-00954-1/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

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

LAFONZO R. TURNER,

 Plaintiff,

 vs.

SINGH, et al.,

 Defendants.

1:23-cv-00820-GSA-PC

 

ORDER GRANTING PLAINTIFF’S 

MOTION FOR CHANGE OF VENUE

(ECF No. 8.)

ORDER FINDING THAT VENUE IS 

PROPER IN THE SACRAMENTO 

DIVISION FOR PLAINTIFF’S CLAIMS

ARISING AT THE CALIFORNIA 

HEALTH CARE FACILITY IN SAN 

JOAQUIN COUNTY

ORDER TRANSFERRING CASE BACK 

TO SACRAMENTO DIVISION OF 

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR 

THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF 

CALIFORNIA

ORDER FOR COURT IN SACRAMENTO 

TO REOPEN CASE NUMBER 2:23-cv00954-DB-PC

I. BACKGROUND

Lafonzo R. Turner (“Plaintiff”) is a state prisoner proceeding pro se with this civil rights 

action pursuant to 42 U.S.C. § 1983. On May 22, 2023, this case was initiated by a motion for a 

temporary restraining order and preliminary injunction filed by Plaintiff at the Sacramento 

Case 2:23-cv-00954-DC-SCR Document 10 Filed 07/17/23 Page 1 of 3
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

Division for the United States District Court for the Eastern District of California. (ECF No. 1.) 

The case was assigned case number 2:23-cv-00954-DB-PC. Plaintiff did not file any other 

pleadings with the motion. (Court Record.) On May 26, 2023, the case was transferred to the 

Fresno Division and assigned case number 1:23-cv-00820-GSA-PC. (ECF No. 3.) 

On May 26, 2023, the Court in Fresno issued an order requiring Plaintiff to file a 

Complaint on the Court’s form and either submit an application to proceed in forma pauperis or 

pay the $420.00 filing fee for this case by June 30, 2023. (ECF No. 5.) On June 16, 2023, 

Plaintiff filed a prisoner civil rights Complaint in compliance with the order. (ECF No. 7.) 

Plaintiff has not submitted an application to proceed in forma pauperis or paid the filing fee. 

(Court Record.)

On July 5, 2023, Plaintiff filed a request for the case to be transferred back to the 

Sacramento Division of the Eastern District, contending that venue in the Fresno Division is 

improper. (ECF No. 8.)

II. VENUE

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

jurisdiction, be brought only in “(1) 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).

Plaintiff argues that venue in the Fresno Division of the Eastern District is improper

because his claims in the Complaint arose out of events at the California Health Care Facility.

This facility is located in San Joaquin County, California. 

The Court has reviewed Plaintiff’s Complaint filed on June 16, 2023 and finds that 

Plaintiff is correct. Plaintiff’s claims in the Complaint arose out of events at the California Health 

Care Facility in Stockton, California, when Plaintiff was incarcerated there in the custody of the 

Case 2:23-cv-00954-DC-SCR Document 10 Filed 07/17/23 Page 2 of 3
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

California Department of Corrections and Rehabilitation. The city of Stockton is located in San 

Joaquin County, California, which is within the Sacramento Division of the Eastern District. 

Therefore, venue for Plaintiff’s case is proper in the Sacramento Division, thus the case shall be 

transferred back to our Sacramento division.

III. CONCLUSION

Based on the foregoing reasons, this case should be transferred back to the Sacramento 

Division of the Eastern Division of California. Pursuant to Local Rule 120(f), a civil action 

which has not been commenced in the proper court may, on the Court’s own motion, be 

transferred to the proper court. 

Accordingly, good cause appearing, IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that:

1. This case be transferred back to the Sacramento Division of the United States 

District Court for the Eastern District of California; 

2. The Court in Sacramento shall reopen case number 2:23-cv-00954-DB-PC; 

3. All future filings shall refer to case number 2:23-cv-00954-DB-PC and shall be 

filed at:

United States District Court

Eastern District of California

501 “I” Street, Suite 4-200

Sacramento, CA 95814

and

4. The Court has not ruled on Plaintiff’s motion to proceed in forma pauperis.

IT IS SO ORDERED.

Dated: July 14, 2023 /s/ Gary S. Austin 

 UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE

Case 2:23-cv-00954-DC-SCR Document 10 Filed 07/17/23 Page 3 of 3