IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 

FOR THE DISTRICT OF OREGON 

DOUGLAS A. IVERS, 

Case No. 3:15-cv-02279-BR 

Plaintiff, 

v. 

CLARK COUNTY WASHINGTON; 

CLARK COUNTY SHERIFFS; 

CLARK COUNTY CLERK'S OFFICE; and 

CLARK COUNTY PROSECUTORS OFFICE, 

Defendants. 

BROWN, Judge. 

Plaintiff brings this civil rights action pro se. 

ORDER 

For the 

reasons that follow, the Court orders that this case be 

transferred to the United States District Court for the Western 

District of Washington, where venue is proper. 

Plaintiff alleges that he worked as a paid police informant 

in Clark County, Washington, and that a detective and clerk 

provided un-redacted copies of police reports to the general 

public in which Plaintiff was identified by name. Plaintiff 

1 - ORDER -

Case 3:15-cv-02279-BR Document 7 Filed 12/17/15 Page 1 of 3
alleges the disclosure violated of 20 C.F.R. 636.2(a) (a) and 50 

U.S.C. § 421 (a) (b) (c). 

Plaintiff also alleges he was denied the right to effective 

assistance of counsel in two cases before the Clark County 

Superior Court when the judge refused Plaintiff's request to 

replace his attorney. 

By way of remedy, Plaintiff seeks money damages, as well as 

an order requiring all record held by the Clark County Sheriff, 

Clerks, Courts, and all city or county departments be turned over 

to the United States Department of Justice or the Federal Bureau 

of Investigation. Plaintiff also seeks to overturn his 2012 Clark 

County convictions. 

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. § 139l(b). When venue is improper, the 

2 - ORDER -

Case 3:15-cv-02279-BR Document 7 Filed 12/17/15 Page 2 of 3
district court has the discretion to either dismiss the case or 

transfer it ''in the interest of justice." 28 U.S.C. § 1406(a). 

It is clear from Plaintiff's Complaint that Plaintiff's 

claims arise out of actions alleged to have been committed by the 

Clark County Sheriff's Department, Clerk, and prosecutor, which is 

within the venue of the Western District of Washington. Thus, 

venue is proper in the Western District of Washington, not the 

District of Oregon, and the Court finds transfer of the case to be 

in the interests of justice. 

CONCLUSION 

For these reasons, IT IS ORDERED that this matter is 

TRANSFERRED for all further proceedings to the United States 

District Court for the Western District of Washington. In light 

of the transfer, the Court defers to the Western District of 

Washington with respect to Plaintiff's Application to Proceed In 

Forma Pauperis (#1), Motion for Appointment of Counsel (#3), 

Application for CM/ECF Registration as a Self-Represented Party 

(#5), and Amended Motion for Appointment of Counsel (#6). 

IT IS SO ORDERED. 

DATED this rf'\ 

3 - ORDER -

day of December, 2015. 

Case 3:15-cv-02279-BR Document 7 Filed 12/17/15 Page 3 of 3