Opinion
1:23-cv-00944-SKO
06-26-2023
ORDER TRANSFERRING CASE
SHEILA K. OBERTO, UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE
On June 23, 2023, Plaintiff Edward D. Hume, proceeding pro se, filed a complaint against Defendants Margaret Poskaitis, Christina Moody, and Janet E. Hume, along with an application to proceed in forma pauperis. (Docs. 1, 2.)
The federal venue statute requires that a civil action, other than one based on diversity jurisdiction, be brought only in “(1) a judicial district in which any defendant resides, if all defendants are residents of the State in which the district is located; (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) if there is no district in which an action may otherwise be brought as provided in this section, any judicial district in which any defendant is subject to the court's personal jurisdiction with respect to such action.” 28 U.S.C. § 1391(b).
Here, two of the Defendants reside in Sonora, California, Plaintiff is a resident of Florida, and one Defendant is a resident of the Commonwealth of Virginia. (See Doc. 1 at 1-3.) The property that is the subject of the dispute is located in San Mateo County (id. at 4-6), which is in the Northern District of California. Therefore, Plaintiff's suit should have been filed in the 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); Abrams Shell v. Shell Oil Co., 165 F.Supp.2d 1096, 1103 (C.D. Cal. 2001). Based on the foregoing, IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that this matter is transferred to the United States District Court for the Northern District of California.
In view of the transfer, this Court has not ruled on Plaintiff's request to proceed in forma pauperis. (See Doc. 2.)
IT IS SO ORDERED.