Source: s3://data.kl3m.ai/documents/govinfo/USCOURTS/USCOURTS-caed-2_10-cv-00658/USCOURTS-caed-2_10-cv-00658-1/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

DAVID UPTON,

Plaintiff, No. 2:10-cv-0658 KJN P

vs.

ARNOLD SCHWARZENEGGER, et al.,

Defendants. ORDER

 /

Plaintiff, a state prisoner proceeding without counsel, has filed a civil rights action

pursuant to 42 U.S.C. § 1983, together with a request to proceed in forma pauperis. On March

26, 2010, the undersigned ordered plaintiff to submit a completed application to proceed in forma

pauperis. Plaintiff has not provided a completed application and instead submitted a notice

stating why he could not comply with the court’s order. However, this action is more properly

brought in the Central District of California. 

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 2:10-cv-00658-KJN Document 9 Filed 04/16/10 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

 Plaintiff has named as defendants the governor of California and the Secretary of 1

CDCR, however, these are nominal defendants in this action.

2

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

In this case, the defendants do not reside in this district. The claim arose in San 1

Bernardino County, which is in the Central District of California. Therefore, plaintiff’s claim

should have been filed in the United States District Court for the Central District of California. 

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).

Accordingly, IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that:

1. This court has not ruled on plaintiff’s request to proceed in forma pauperis; and

2. This matter is transferred to the United States District Court for the Central

District of California.

DATED: April 14, 2010

_____________________________________

KENDALL J. NEWMAN

UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE

upto0658.21

Case 2:10-cv-00658-KJN Document 9 Filed 04/16/10 Page 2 of 2