Opinion
23-cv-04048-AMO (PR)
11-17-2023
In re JAMES ALBERT HODGES,
ORDER OF TRANSFER
ARACELI MARTÍNEZ-OLGUÍN UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE
This suit was reassigned from a magistrate judge to the undersigned judge in light of a recent Ninth Circuit decision. On August 10, 2023, plaintiff, who is currently in custody at the Pre-Trial Facility of the Kern County Sheriff's Office, filed a hand-written letter with the Court, which is difficult to decipher, but it seems that he wishes to pursue a civil action. See Dkt. 1. On that same date, the Clerk of the Court sent notices to plaintiff, informing him that his action could not go forward because he had not filed a complaint and a completed prisoner's in forma pauperis (“IFP”) application. Dkts. 2, 3. The Clerk provided him with blank complaint and IFP application forms, along with a return envelope, instructions, and a notification that he must fill out the complaint form and either pay the fee or return the completed IFP application within twenty-eight days, or his action would be dismissed. Id.
Williams v. King, 875 F.3d 500, 503 (9th Cir. 2017) (concluding that magistrate judge lacked jurisdiction to dismiss case on initial screening because unserved defendants had not consented to proceed before a magistrate judge).
On August 25, 2023, plaintiff submitted his IFP application to the Court. Dkt. 5. However, his IFP application is incomplete because he has not provided his six-month prisoner trust account statement. See id.
On September 5, 2023, plaintiff filed a document entitled, “Claim,” (rather than a completed complaint form) against the Kern County Superior Court using a California government claim form for claims against the state judicial branch. See Dkt. 8. The “Claim” is similarly hand-written and difficult to decipher, but the Court construes it as a complaint against Kern County officials. Id.
Here, because the acts complained of seem to have occurred in Kern County, which is located in the Eastern District of California, and it appears that defendants reside in that district, venue properly lies in that district. See 28 U.S.C. § 1391(b).
Accordingly, in the interest of justice and pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1406(a), this action is TRANSFERRED to the United States District Court for the Eastern District of California. The Clerk shall transfer the case forthwith.
All pending motions are TERMINATED on this Court's docket as no longer pending in this district. If plaintiff wishes to further pursue this action, he must complete the IFP application required by the United States District Court for the Eastern District of California and mail it to that district.
IT IS SO ORDERED.