Source: s3://data.kl3m.ai/documents/govinfo/USCOURTS/USCOURTS-caed-2_05-cv-00874/USCOURTS-caed-2_05-cv-00874-0/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

ANSAR EL MUHAMMAD, S/C

BENNETT,

Plaintiff, No. CIV S-05-0874 GEB DAD P

vs.

ALAMEDA COUNTY SHERIFF

DEPARTMENT, et al.,

Defendants. ORDER

 /

Plaintiff, a state prisoner proceeding pro se, has filed a civil rights action pursuant

to 42 U.S.C. § 1983, together with an application to proceed in forma pauperis. At the present

time, the plaintiff is confined in Deuel Vocational Institution in Tracy, California. A review of

plaintiff’s complaint reveals that the claims arose while plaintiff was confined in the Santa Rita

Jail in Alameda County. The defendants are the Alameda County Sheriff and a deputy sheriff.

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

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

Case 2:05-cv-00874-GEB-DAD Document 4 Filed 05/18/05 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

no district in which the action may otherwise be brought.” 28 U.S.C. § 1391(b). 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).

In this case, it does not appear that any defendant resides in the Eastern District of

California, and all of the claims arose in the Northern District of California. Therefore,

plaintiff’s complaint should have been filed in the United States District Court for the Northern

District of California.

In the interest of justice, IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that this action is transferred

to the United States District Court for the Northern District of California for all further

proceedings.

DATED: May 17, 2005.

DAD:13:bb

muha0874.21

Case 2:05-cv-00874-GEB-DAD Document 4 Filed 05/18/05 Page 2 of 2