Document ID: s3://data.kl3m.ai/documents/govinfo/USCOURTS/USCOURTS-caed-1_07-cv-01289/USCOURTS-caed-1_07-cv-01289-0/pdf.json

Parties Involved:
Jonathan Bailey
Plaintiff
Jules E. Fleuret
Defendant

Document Text:

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

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

JONATHAN BAILEY, 1:07-cv-1289 OWW NEW (TAG)

Plaintiff, 

vs. ORDER OF TRANSFER 

JUDGE JULES E. FLEURET, 

Defendant.

 /

Plaintiff, a state prisoner proceeding pro se, has filed a civil complaint, which purports to allege

claims for libel, slander, malicious prosecution, and false imprisonment, but appears to be in the nature

of a civil rights action under 42 U.S.C. § 1983 or an appeal of plaintifff’s criminal conviction. 

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 the 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).

In this case, although Plaintiff alleges diversity jurisdiction, both he and the Defendant are

California residents. Plaintiff is seekingmonetarydamages from the state court judge who presided over

his criminal trial and conviction, alleging that the judge acted maliciously and violated state law.

Plaintiff’s criminal proceedings took place in San Bernardino County, which is in the Central District

of California. Therefore, the complaint should have been filed in the United States District Court for

Case 1:07-cv-01289-OWW -LJO Document 6 Filed 09/12/07 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

the Central District of California. In the interest of justice, a federal court may transfer a case 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 this matter is transferred to the United States

District Court for the Central District of California.

IT IS SO ORDERED.

Dated: September 11, 2007 /s/ Theresa A. Goldner 

j6eb3d UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE 

Case 1:07-cv-01289-OWW -LJO Document 6 Filed 09/12/07 Page 2 of 2