From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

Hill v. Martinez

United States District Court, Central District of California
Jun 1, 2021
CV 21-4347-JLS (E) (C.D. Cal. Jun. 1, 2021)

Opinion

CV 21-4347-JLS (E)

06-01-2021

CYMEYOLV V. HILL, Plaintiff, v. C. MARTINEZ, Defendant. v.


ORDER TO SHOW CAUSE

CHARLES F. EICK UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE

Plaintiff, allegedly a civil detainee confined at the Salinas Valley Prison in Monterey County, California, filed this civil rights action pursuant to 42 U.S.C. section 1983 on May 25, 2021. All of the Defendants are employees of the prison. Plaintiff alleges events or omissions assertedly occurring at the prison, which is located within the Northern District of California.

Section 1391(b) of Title 28, United States Code, provides:

A civil action may be brought 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 person al jurisdiction with respect to such action.

Here, it appears that Defendants reside in the Northern District of California, and that the events or omissions giving rise to Plaintiff's purported claims allegedly occurred within the Northern District of California.

Section 1406(a) of Title 28, United States Code, provides:

The district court of a district in which is filed a case laying venue in the wrong division or district shall dismiss, or if it be in the interest of justice, transfer such case to any district or division in which it could have been brought.

This Court has the power to decide the venue issue on its own motion and to dismiss or transfer the action before a responsive pleading is filed. See Costlow v. Weeks, 790 F.2d 1486, 1488 (9th Cir. 1986).

Within thirty (30) days of the date of this Order, the parties shall show cause in writing, if there be any, why this action should not be transferred to the United States District Court for the Northern District of California on the ground that venue is improper in the Central District of California. Failure timely to respond to this Order to Show Cause may result in the transfer of the action.


Summaries of

Hill v. Martinez

United States District Court, Central District of California
Jun 1, 2021
CV 21-4347-JLS (E) (C.D. Cal. Jun. 1, 2021)
Case details for

Hill v. Martinez

Case Details

Full title:CYMEYOLV V. HILL, Plaintiff, v. C. MARTINEZ, Defendant. v.

Court:United States District Court, Central District of California

Date published: Jun 1, 2021

Citations

CV 21-4347-JLS (E) (C.D. Cal. Jun. 1, 2021)