Source: s3://data.kl3m.ai/documents/govinfo/USCOURTS/USCOURTS-caed-2_07-cv-02397/USCOURTS-caed-2_07-cv-02397-0/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

1

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

JONATHAN LEE RICHES,

Plaintiff, No. CIV S 07-2397 MCE DAD P

vs.

DUANE CHAPMAN, et al.,

Defendants. ORDER

 /

Plaintiff, a claimed “political prisoner” proceeding pro se, has filed a document

entitled “complaint” pursuant to 42 U.S.C. § 1983. Plaintiff has named as defendants Duane

Chapman, Walt Disney Company, Hearst Corporation, and General Electric Company. Although

plaintiff has obviously named improper defendants in his complaint, he has included therein

potentially serious allegations about the conditions of confinement at FCI Williamsburg in

Salters, South Carolina. For example, he alleges that he is locked in solitary confinement for

twenty-four hours a day, that seventeen hours pass between meals, and that certain defendants are

planning on killing him. In an abundance of caution, the court will transfer the matter to the

district where plaintiff’s claims could be properly brought.

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

diversity jurisdiction, be brought only in “(1) a judicial district where any defendant resides, if all

Case 2:07-cv-02397-MCE -DAD Document 3 Filed 11/16/07 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

2

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). 

In this case, plaintiff’s claims arise out of Williamsburg County, which is in the

District of South Carolina. Therefore, plaintiff’s claim should have been filed in the United

States District Court for the District of South Carolina. 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 District of South Carolina.

DATED: November 15, 2007.

DAD:9:cm

rich2397.21

Case 2:07-cv-02397-MCE -DAD Document 3 Filed 11/16/07 Page 2 of 2