Source: s3://data.kl3m.ai/documents/govinfo/USCOURTS/USCOURTS-caed-2_04-cv-00884/USCOURTS-caed-2_04-cv-00884-9/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

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

BRIAN LEE CHRISTMAN,

Plaintiff, No. CIV S-04-0884 FCD PAN P

vs.

CALIFORNIA DEPARTMENT

OF CORRECTIONS, et al.,

Defendants. ORDER

 /

Plaintiff is a state prisoner seeking relief pursuant to 42 U.S.C. § 1983. On

January 31, 2006, plaintiff filed a motion for change of venue.

Plaintiff alleges that the court has failed to acknowledge plaintiff’s pleadings and

motions and has permitted defendants to abuse plaintiff in violation of the Eighth Amendment. 

He seeks an order transferring this action to the United States District Court for the Central

District of California.

Where venue initially is proper, a court may transfer a case from one federal

district court to another where the action could also have been brought for the convenience of the

parties and witnesses. 28 U.S.C. § 1404(a). “Convenience” refers to the parties’ ease of access

to evidence and witnesses and the like. Sparling v. Hoffman Const. Co., Inc., 864 F.2d 635 (9th

Cir. 1988). Plaintiff has not demonstrated he could have brought this action in the Central 

Case 2:04-cv-00884-FCD-EFB Document 63 Filed 04/25/06 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

2

District of California, see 28 U.S.C. 1391(b), and he has not shown that the convenience of the

parties would be served thereby.

Accordingly, IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that plaintiff’s January 31, 2006,

motion for change of venue is denied.

DATED: April 24, 2006.

\004

\chri0884.dny chng venue

Case 2:04-cv-00884-FCD-EFB Document 63 Filed 04/25/06 Page 2 of 2