Source: s3://data.kl3m.ai/documents/govinfo/USCOURTS/USCOURTS-cand-3_19-cv-00048/USCOURTS-cand-3_19-cv-00048-1/pdf.json

Nature of Suit Code: 365
Nature of Suit: Personal Injury - Product Liability
Cause of Action: 28:1331 Fed. Question: Tort Action

---

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

Northern District of California

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

E. DRAKE,

Plaintiff,

v.

SAFEWAY INC., et al.,

Defendants.

Case No. 19-cv-00048-DMR 

SECOND ORDER TO SHOW CAUSE 

WHY CASE SHOULD NOT BE 

TRANSFERRED

Pro se Plaintiff E. Drake filed the complaint and an application to proceed in forma 

pauperis (“IFP”) on January 3, 2019. [Docket Nos. 1, 2.] The complaint names Defendants 

Safeway Inc. (“Safeway”), Cerberus Capital Management, A & L Foods, Maspeth Kosher Food, 

LLC, and Alle Processing Corporation. Plaintiff lives in Atlanta, Georgia, and the incident that 

forms the basis for the complaint took place in Dallas, Texas. See Compl. ¶¶ 11, 12. The court 

issued an Order to Show Cause why the case should not be transferred due to improper venue 

pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1406(a), noting that “it appears that the proper venue for this case is the 

Northern District of Texas because that is where ‘a substantial part of the events or omissions 

giving rise to the claim occurred.’” [Docket No. 4 (quoting 28 U.S.C. § 1391(b)(2)).] 

On January 17, 2019, Plaintiff filed an amended complaint which names only Safeway and 

Sedgwick Claims Management Services, Inc. (“Sedgwick”) as Defendants. [Docket No. 5.] He 

also filed a “partial motion for nonsuit” seeking dismissal of A & L Foods, Maspeth Kosher Food, 

LLC, and Alle Processing Corporation without prejudice. [Docket No. 8.] In his response to the 

Order to Show Cause, Plaintiff states that Safeway is headquartered in this district and that 

Sedgwick is located in and does business in this district, but that the court lacks personal 

jurisdiction over A & L Foods, Maspeth Kosher Food, LLC, and Alle Processing Corporation. 

[Docket No. 7.] According to Plaintiff, his dismissal of A & L Foods, Maspeth Kosher Food, 

LLC, and Alle Processing Corporation “has cured the Courts [sic] inquiry regarding transferring 

Case 3:19-cv-00048-WHA Document 10 Filed 02/07/19 Page 1 of 2
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

United States District Court

Northern District of California

the above cause of action to the Northern District of Texas.” Id. On January 30, 2019, Plaintiff 

filed a second amended complaint against Safeway and Sedgwick. [Docket No. 9.] 

Pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1391, a civil action may be filed in “a judicial district in which any 

defendant resides, if all defendants are residents of the State in which the district is located[.]” 28 

U.S.C. § 1391(b)(1). “[A]n entity with the capacity to sue and be sued in its common name under 

applicable law . . . shall be deemed to reside, if a defendant, in any judicial district in which such 

defendant is subject to the court’s personal jurisdiction with respect to the civil action in 

question[.]” 28 U.S.C. § 1391(c)(2). According to the allegations in the second amended 

complaint, Safeway and Sedgwick each do business in this district and are subject to personal 

jurisdiction in this court. Second Am. Compl. ¶¶ 4, 6. Therefore, it appears that venue is proper 

pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1391(b)(1), as both Defendants “reside” in this district.

However, there is no indication that Plaintiff’s claims have anything to do with 

Defendants’ businesses in California or that the claims have any connection to this district. 

Instead, Plaintiff alleges that he purchased contaminated ground beef from a Safeway-owned 

grocery store in Dallas, was injured in Dallas, and reported the injury to the store in Dallas. See

Compl. ¶¶ 12, 13; Second Am. Compl. ¶¶ 12, 13.

Therefore, by no later than February 22, 2019, Plaintiff shall file a statement explaining 

why this case should not be transferred to the United States District Court for the Northern District 

of Texas pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1404(a), which provides that a court may transfer a civil action 

to any other district “[f]or the convenience of parties and witnesses [and] in the interest of justice.” 

IT IS SO ORDERED.

Dated: February 7, 2019

______________________________________

Donna M. Ryu

United States Magistrate Judge

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORN

I

A

IT IS SO ORDERED

Judge Donna M. Ryu

Case 3:19-cv-00048-WHA Document 10 Filed 02/07/19 Page 2 of 2