Opinion
22-CV-10627 (LTS)
12-19-2022
ANGELINA ROGERS, Plaintiff, v. PETER GENE HERNANDEZ a/k/a BRUNO MARS, Defendant.
TRANSFER ORDER
LAURA TAYLOR SWAIN, CHIEF UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE
Plaintiff Angelina Rogers, who resides in Milwaukee, Wisconsin, brings this pro se action invoking the court's federal question jurisdiction, alleging that Defendant Peter Gene Hernandez a/k/a Bruno Marsviolated her rights in Milwaukee and Wauwatosa, Wisconsin. For the following reasons, the Court transfers this action under 28 U.S.C. § 1406 to the United States District Court for the Eastern District of Wisconsin.
On page 4 of the complaint, Plaintiff lists Roberto C. Guzman of Milwaukee, Wisconsin, as the sole Defendant.
DISCUSSION
Under 28 U.S.C. § 1391(b), 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 personal jurisdiction with respect to such action.
Under Section 1391(c), a “natural person” resides in the district where the person is domiciled, and an “entity with the capacity to sue and be sued” resides in any judicial district where it is subject to personal jurisdiction with respect to the civil action in question. See 28 U.S.C. § 1391(c)(1), (2).
Plaintiff alleges that Defendant resides in Wisconsin, and that he committed crimes against her in Milwaukee and Wauwatosa, Wisconsin. Because Defendant resides in Wisconsin, and the alleged events occurred in Wisconsin, from the face of the complaint, it is clear that venue is not proper in this court under Section 1391(b)(1), (2).
Under 28 U.S.C. § 1406, if a plaintiff files a case in the wrong venue, the Court “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.” 28 U.S.C. § 1406(a). Plaintiff's claims arose in Milwaukee and Wauwatosa, Wisconsin, which are in Milwaukee County. See 28 U.S.C. § 130(a). Accordingly, venue lies in the Eastern District of Wisconsin, 28 U.S.C. § 1391(b)(2), and in the interest of justice, the Court transfers this action to the United States District Court for the Eastern District of Wisconsin, 28 U.S.C. § 1406(a).
CONCLUSION
The Clerk of Court is directed to transfer this action to the United States District Court for the Eastern District of Wisconsin. Whether Plaintiff should be permitted to proceed further without prepayment of fees is a determination to be made by the transferee court. A summons shall not issue from this court. This order closes this case.
The Court certifies under 28 U.S.C. § 1915(a)(3) that any appeal from this order would not be taken in good faith, and therefore in forma pauperis status is denied for the purpose of an appeal. Cf. Coppedge v. United States, 369 U.S. 438, 444-45 (1962) (holding that an appellant demonstrates good faith when he seeks review of a nonfrivolous issue).
SO ORDERED.