Document ID: s3://data.kl3m.ai/documents/govinfo/USCOURTS/USCOURTS-cand-3_07-cv-02304/USCOURTS-cand-3_07-cv-02304-0/pdf.json

Parties Involved:
Butte County Jail
Defendant
Don Durrett
Defendant
James L. Lang
Plaintiff
Perry L. Reniff
Defendant

Document Text:

United States District Court

For the Northern District of California

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

United States District Court

For the Northern District of California

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

FOR THE NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

JAMES L. LANG,

Plaintiff,

 v.

BUTTE COUNTY SHERIFF

PERRY L. RENIFF; CHIEF

MEDICAL EXAMINER DON

DURRETT,

Defendants. ____________________________

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

) 

No. C 07-2304 MMC (PR) 

ORDER OF TRANSFER

(Docket No. 2)

On April 27, 2007, plaintiff, an inmate at the Butte County Jail and proceeding pro se,

filed a complaint pursuant to 42 U.S.C. § 1983 in the above-titled civil rights case. Plaintiff

alleges two Butte County Jail officials violated his constitutional rights. 

Venue may be raised by the court sua sponte where the defendant has not filed a

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

1486, 1488 (9th Cir. 1986). When jurisdiction is not founded solely on diversity, venue is

proper in (1) the district in which any defendant resides, if all of the defendants reside in the

same state; (2) the 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. See 28 U.S.C. § 1391(b). When venue is

improper, the district court has the discretion to either dismiss the case or transfer it “in the

interest of justice.” See 28 U.S.C. § 1406(a). 

Case 3:07-cv-02304-MMC Document 4 Filed 06/08/07 Page 1 of 2
United States District Court

For the Northern District of California

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

It is clear from the instant complaint and the attachments thereto that plaintiff’s claims

arise out of actions alleged to have taken place in Butte County by defendants located in

Butte County. Butte County lies within the venue of the Eastern District of California. See

28 U.S.C. § 84(b). As a result, venue is proper in the Eastern District of California, not in the

Northern District. 

Accordingly, in the interest of justice, the above-titled action is hereby

TRANSFERRED to the United States District Court for the Eastern District of California. In

light of the transfer, this Court will defer to the Eastern District with respect to plaintiff’s in

forma pauperis application. 

The Clerk shall close the file and terminate Docket No. 2 on this Court’s docket. 

IT IS SO ORDERED.

DATED: June 8, 2007 _____________________________

MAXINE M. CHESNEY

United States District Judge

Case 3:07-cv-02304-MMC Document 4 Filed 06/08/07 Page 2 of 2