From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

Mills v. Deems

United States District Court, Eastern District of California
Sep 28, 2022
22-cv-05433-LB (E.D. Cal. Sep. 28, 2022)

Opinion

22-cv-05433-LB

09-28-2022

RODNEY JAMES MILLS, Plaintiff, v. JUDGE MICHAEL R. DEEMS, et al., Defendants.


ORDER OF TRANSFER

LAUREL BEELER UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE

Rodney Mills filed this pro se civil rights action complaining about events and omissions occurring during his criminal trial in Butte County and within the venue of the Eastern District of California. The defendants are employed by Butte County and apparently reside in the Eastern District of California. Plaintiff is detained in the Eastern District of California. No defendant is alleged to reside in, and none of the events or omissions giving rise to the complaint occurred in, the Northern District of California. Venue therefore would be proper in the Eastern District of California and not in this one. 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.

IT IS SO ORDERED.


Summaries of

Mills v. Deems

United States District Court, Eastern District of California
Sep 28, 2022
22-cv-05433-LB (E.D. Cal. Sep. 28, 2022)
Case details for

Mills v. Deems

Case Details

Full title:RODNEY JAMES MILLS, Plaintiff, v. JUDGE MICHAEL R. DEEMS, et al.…

Court:United States District Court, Eastern District of California

Date published: Sep 28, 2022

Citations

22-cv-05433-LB (E.D. Cal. Sep. 28, 2022)