Document ID: s3://data.kl3m.ai/documents/govinfo/USCOURTS/USCOURTS-cand-3_10-cv-00885/USCOURTS-cand-3_10-cv-00885-0/pdf.json

Parties Involved:
Victor Manuel Correa
Plaintiff
Stephen M. Hall
Defendant
San Mateo County Superior Court
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

1

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

VICTOR MANUEL CORREA,

Plaintiff, No. CIV S-10-0420 DAD P

vs.

STEPHEN M. HALL,

Defendant. ORDER

 /

Plaintiff, a state prisoner proceeding pro se, has filed a civil rights action pursuant

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

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

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

In this case, defendant San Mateo County Superior Court Judge Stephen Hall does

not reside in this district. Plaintiff’s claim arose in San Mateo County, which is located within

the Northern District of California. Therefore, plaintiff’s claim should have been filed in the

Case 3:10-cv-00885-RS Document 4 Filed 03/01/10 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

2

United States District Court for the Northern 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 February 18, 2010 request to proceed in

forma pauperis; and

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

District of California.

DATED: March 1, 2010.

DAD:md/4

corr0420.21

Case 3:10-cv-00885-RS Document 4 Filed 03/01/10 Page 2 of 2