Source: s3://data.kl3m.ai/documents/govinfo/USCOURTS/USCOURTS-caed-1_02-cv-05646/USCOURTS-caed-1_02-cv-05646-13/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

27

28 This action originally involved other claims which arose in this district and because the current claim was 1

related to those claims properly brought here, the Court did not dismiss this claim or sever it and transfer it.

1

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

RANDALL E. ELLIS,

Plaintiff,

v.

STEVEN CAMBRA, JR., et al.,

Defendants.

 /

CASE NO. 1:02-cv-05646-AWI-SMS PC

ORDER DENYING PLAINTIFF’S MOTION

FOR CHANGE OF VENUE

(Doc. 107)

On March 17, 2008, Plaintiff Randall E. Ellis (“Plaintiff”) filed a motion for a change of

venue and to stay summary judgment proceedings following his transfer from California State

Prison-Corcoran in this district to Pelican Bay State Prison in the Northern District.

“For the convenience of parties and witnesses, in the interest of justice, a district court may

transfer any civil action to any other district or division where it might have been brought.” 28

U.S.C. § 1404(a). Here, there are no ground justifying transfer of this action. Plaintiff’s argument

that because the event occurred in the Northern District, because Defendant resides in the Northern

District, and because Plaintiff is now in the Northern District, it is in the interest of conservation of

resources to transfer the case is unavailing. 

This action has been pending in this district court since 2002. The Court has, concurrently

1

with this order, addressed Plaintiff’s pending discovery motions, and the parties have filed crossmotions for summary judgment. Transfer of this action to a court unfamiliar with the case would

Case 1:02-cv-05646-AWI -SKO Document 111 Filed 03/27/08 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

27

28

2

serve to tax judicial resources, not conserve them. Further, until and unless this action reaches trial,

everything is resolved on the papers, making it immaterial where Plaintiff and Defendant currently

reside. Plaintiff chose this venue by virtue of filing suit here and Plaintiff’s transfer to a prison

outside of this district is simply not a compelling reason to transfer this case to another district.

Plaintiff’s motion for a change of venue is HEREBY DENIED. Plaintiff’s motion for a stay

of summary judgment is resolved in a separate order issued concurrently with this order.

IT IS SO ORDERED.

Dated: March 27, 2008 /s/ Sandra M. Snyder 

icido3 UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE

Case 1:02-cv-05646-AWI -SKO Document 111 Filed 03/27/08 Page 2 of 2