UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

FOR THE

MIDDLE DISTRICT OF PENNSYLVANIA

MAURICE WALKER, :

:

Plaintiff, : No. 4:CV-05-1935

:

vs. : Complaint Filed 09/26/05

:

CAPTAIN GARP HILER, et al., : (Judge Muir)

:

Defendants, : (Magistrate Judge Blewitt)

ORDER

October 25, 2005

THE BACKGROUND OF THIS ORDER IS AS FOLLOWS:

On September 26, 2005, plaintiff Maurice Walker initiated

this action by filing 1) a civil rights complaint against six

defendants, and 2) an application to proceed in forma pauperis. 

When he filed the complaint Walker was an inmate at the State

Correctional Institution in Somerset, Pennsylvania. The claims

in the complaint stem from events which had occurred while Walker

had been housed at the State Correctional Institution at Laurel

Highlands, Pennsylvania. All of the Defendants are corrections

officers at that institution. 

The Clerk of Court assigned this case to us and referred it

to Magistrate Judge Thomas M. Blewitt for preliminary

consideration. On September 27, 2005, the Magistrate Judge

issued a report recommending that the action be transferred to

the United States District Court for the Western District of

Pennsylvania because the claims arose in that district and all of

Case 4:05-cv-01935-MM Document 8 Filed 10/25/05 Page 1 of 4
2

the defendants are located in that district. The Magistrate

Judge further recommends that the decision on Walker’s

application to proceed in forma pauperis be made by the

transferee court.

The time allowed for the parties to file objections to the

Report and recommendation expired on October 17, 2005, and to

this date no objections have been filed. When no objections are

filed to the report of a Magistrate Judge, we need only review

that report as we in our discretion deem appropriate. Thomas v.

Arn, 474 U.S. 145, 151-52 (1985).

Sub-part (a) of Title 28 U.S.C. § 1404, entitled “Change of

venue,” provides in its entirety that “[f]or the convenience of

parties and witnesses, in the interest of justice, a district

court may transfer any civil action to another district or

division where it might have been brought.” 28 U.S.C. § 1404(a).

This action could have been brought in the United States District

Court for the Western District of Pennsylvania. 

In evaluating whether an action should be transferred

pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1404(a), we are to “consider all relevant

factors to determine whether on balance the litigation would more

conveniently proceed and the interests of justice be better

served by transfer to a different forum.” Jumara v. State Farm

Ins. Co., 55 F.3d 873, 879 (3d Cir. 1995). 

Commentators describe the relevant factors as addressing a

Case 4:05-cv-01935-MM Document 8 Filed 10/25/05 Page 2 of 4
3

“private interest” or a “public interest.” Private interests

include the plaintiff’s forum preference, the defendant’s forum

preference, where the claim arose, the convenience of the parties

as indicated by their relative physical and financial condition,

the convenience of the witnesses -- but only to the extent that

the witnesses may actually be unavailable for trial in one of the

fora, and the location of evidence. Id.

The public interests to be considered include enforceability

of the judgment, “practical considerations that could make trial

easy, expeditious, or inexpensive,” the relative administrative

difficulty in the two fora resulting from court congestion, the

local interest in deciding local controversies at home, the

public policies of the fora, and the familiarity of the trial

judge with the applicable state law in a diversity case.” Id. 

The only reason that Walker was able to file his complaint

in this court is that his place of confinement was in this

judicial district. We agree with Magistrate Judge Blewitt’s

conclusion that the vast majority of the relevant factors weigh

in favor of transferring this case to the United States District

Court for the Western District of Pennsylvania. 

We will adopt Magistrate Judge Blewitt’s Report and

Case 4:05-cv-01935-MM Document 8 Filed 10/25/05 Page 3 of 4
4

Recommendation as our own. 

NOW, THEREFORE, IT IS ORDERED THAT:

1. The Magistrate Judge’s Report and Recommendation 

(Document 6) is adopted in toto.

2. This case is hereby transferred to the United States

District Court for the Western District of

Pennsylvania.

3. The disposition of Walker’s application to proceed in

forma pauperis is reserved for that court.

s/Malcolm Muir 

MUIR, U.S. District Judge

MM:ga

Case 4:05-cv-01935-MM Document 8 Filed 10/25/05 Page 4 of 4