Indeed, Lawrence indicated that one of his cases has a motion to transfer venue from the Eastern District of Michigan to the Western District of Michigan. See Harper v. Arkesteyn, et al., 2:19-cv-11106-AJT-DRG (E.D. Mich., ECF 44, PageID 192). But that motion to transfer venue was denied in February of this year.

The district court initially dismissed the case sua sponte pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1915(e)(2)(B) for failure to state a claim upon which relief may be granted. Harper v. Arkesteyn, No. 2:19-CV-11106, 2019 WL 3714447, at *3 (E.D. Mich. Aug. 7, 2019). The Sixth Circuit reversed and remanded, concluding that the district court erred by dismissing the case because “the complaint contain[ed] sufficient factual matter to support a plausible claim that his procedural-due-process rights were violated when the defendants classified him as a sex offender.” Harper, 2020 WL 4877518, at *3. Specifically, the Court considered that the plaintiff had never been convicted of a sex crime or accused of any sexual wrongdoing during his incarceration.