Source: s3://data.kl3m.ai/documents/govinfo/USCOURTS/USCOURTS-casd-3_06-cv-02375/USCOURTS-casd-3_06-cv-02375-0/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

27

28

1 06cv2375

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

GEORGE RICHARDSON,

CDC #E-17706,

Civil No. 06-2375 JM (JMA)

Plaintiff, ORDER TRANSFERRING CIVIL

ACTION FOR LACK OF PROPER

VENUE TO THE CENTRAL 

DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA,

WESTERN DIVISION, PURSUANT TO

28 U.S.C. § 84(c)(2), 28 U.S.C. § 1391(b)

AND 28 U.S.C. § 1406(a)

 vs.

CORRECTIONS OFFICER PARKER;

SGT. E. TELL; LT. R. HENDERSON; 

CHIEF DEPUTY WARDEN M. MONTEIRO, 

Defendants. 

Plaintiff, a prisoner currently incarcerated at Richard J. Donovan Correctional Facility in San

Diego, California, has filed a civil rights Complaint pursuant to 42 U.S.C. § 1983. Plaintiff claims that

various California State Prison, Los Angeles County (“LAC”) officials violated his right to due process

by improperly handling and losing his personal property while he was housed there in October and

December 2004. (See Compl. at 1-3.) 

Plaintiff has not prepaid the $350 civil filing fee mandated by 28 U.S.C. § 1914(a); instead he

has filed a Motion to Proceed In Forma Pauperis pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1915(a) [Doc. No. 2].

I. Lack of Proper Venue

Upon initial review of the Complaint, the Court finds that Plaintiff’s case lacks proper

venue. Venue may be raised by a court sua sponte where the defendant has not yet filed a responsive

pleading and the time for doing so has not run. Costlow v. Weeks, 790 F.2d 1486,

1488 (9th Cir. 1986). “A civil action wherein jurisdiction is not founded solely on diversity of

Case 3:06-cv-02375-JM-JMA Document 3 Filed 11/07/06 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

27

28

1

 Because the Court finds transfer appropriate, it defers ruling on Plaintiff’s Motion to Proceed

In Forma Pauperis [Doc. No. 2] to the Central District of California and expresses no opinion as to

whether Plaintiff’s Complaint alleges facts sufficient to survive the mandatory sua sponte screening

provisions of 28 U.S.C. § 1915(e)(2) and § 1915A(b).

2 06cv2375

citizenship may, except as otherwise provided by law, 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 no district in which the action may otherwise be brought.” 28 U.S.C. §

1391(b); Costlow, 790 F.2d at 1488; Decker Coal Co. v. Commonwealth Edison Co., 805 F.2d 834,

842 (9th Cir. 1986). “The district court of a district in which is filed a case laying venue in the

wrong division or district shall dismiss, or if it be in the interests of justice, transfer such case to any

district in or division in which it could have been brought.” 28 U.S.C. § 1406(a).

Here, Plaintiff claims constitutional violations originally arising out of events which

occurred at California State Prison, Lancaster, which is located in Los Angeles County, not San

Diego or Imperial Counties. Moreover, all Defendants are alleged to reside in Los Angeles County;

none are alleged to reside in San Diego or Imperial Counties. See Compl. at 2. Therefore, venue is

proper in the Central District of California, Western Division, pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 84(c)(2), and

not in the Southern District of California. See 28 U.S.C. § 1391(b); Costlow, 790 F.2d at 1488.

II. Conclusion and Order

Accordingly, IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that the Clerk of the Court shall transfer this case

for lack of proper venue, in the interests of justice and for the convenience of all parties, to the docket

of the United States District Court for the Central District of California, Western

Division, pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 84(c)(2), 28 U.S.C. § 1391(b) and 28 U.S.C. § 1406(a).1

IT IS SO ORDERED. 

 DATED: November 7, 2006 Hon. Jeffrey T. Miller

 United States District Judge

Case 3:06-cv-02375-JM-JMA Document 3 Filed 11/07/06 Page 2 of 2