Source: s3://data.kl3m.ai/documents/govinfo/USCOURTS/USCOURTS-caed-2_06-cv-01202/USCOURTS-caed-2_06-cv-01202-0/pdf.json

Nature of Suit Code: 530
Nature of Suit: Prisoner Petitions - Habeas Corpus
Cause of Action: 28:2254 Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus (State)

---

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

PARRISH BRYANT GARVIN,

Petitioner, No. CIV S-06-1202 FCD DAD P

vs.

ROBERT A. HOREL, et al., 

Respondents. ORDER

 /

Petitioner, a state prisoner proceeding pro se, has filed an application for a writ of

habeas corpus pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 2254. No filing fee or an application requesting leave to

proceed in forma pauperis has been submitted. In his petition, petitioner challenges a judgment

of conviction entered by the Kings County Superior Court in 2002. Kings County is part of the

Fresno Division of the United States District Court for the Eastern District of California. See

Local Rule 3-120(d). 

Pursuant to Local Rule 3-120(f), a civil action which has not been commenced in

the proper division of a court may, on the court’s own motion, be transferred to the proper

division of the court. Therefore, this action will be transferred to the Fresno Division of the

court. The court also notes that petitioner is subject to a vexatious litigant order. See Garvin v.

Kings County, CIV F-00-5140 AWI LJO P, Order, filed 3-7-00. The court makes no ruling as to

Case 2:06-cv-01202-FCD-DAD Document 3 Filed 06/12/06 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

 The habeas petition was inadvertently filed before being screened pursuant to the 1

vexatious litigant order.

2

whether this habeas action falls within the scope of that order or, if so, whether petitioner has

complied with the requirements set forth in that order in filing this habeas action.1

Good cause appearing, IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that:

1. This court has not ruled on whether petitioner has complied with the vexatious

litigant order;

2. This action is transferred to the United States District Court for the Eastern

District of California sitting in Fresno; and

3. All future filings shall reference the new Fresno case number assigned and

shall be filed at:

United States District Court

Eastern District of California

2500 Tulare Street

Fresno, CA 93721

DATED: June 9, 2006.

DAD:4

garv1202.109

Case 2:06-cv-01202-FCD-DAD Document 3 Filed 06/12/06 Page 2 of 2