Rosiere v. United States

12 Citing cases

  1. Johnson v. BL Watertown LLC

    CIV. 24-00416 LEK-KJM (D. Haw. Nov. 4, 2024)

    If this Court ultimately determines that this case has been filed in an improper venue, this Court should either “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.” See 28 U.S.C. § 1406(a). “A court should examine a plaintiff's claim to determine whether the interests of justice require transfer instead of dismissal.” Rosiere v. United States, CIVIL NO. 16-00260 HG-RLP, 2016 WL 3408848, at *2 (D. Hawai'i June 1, 2016) (citing King v. Russell, 963 F.2d 1301, 1305 (9th Cir. 1992)). In making that determination, this Court would consider the fact that Johnson has filed multiple actions in this district court that were dismissed based upon improper venue.

  2. Johnson v. Syracuse Police Dep't

    CIV. 24-00444 LEK-KJM (D. Haw. Nov. 4, 2024)

    “A court should examine a plaintiff's claim to determine whether the interests of justice require transfer instead of dismissal.” Rosiere v. United States, CIVIL NO. 1600260 HG-RLP, 2016 WL 3408848, at *2 (D. Hawai'i June 1, 2016) (citing King v. Russell, 963 F.2d 1301, 1305 (9th Cir. 1992)).Although this Court acknowledges that a pro se plaintiff is generally entitled to notice of the defects in his complaint and the opportunity to amend, see Lucas, 66 F.3d at 248, this Court concludes that dismissal without leave to amend is appropriate in this case because the Kentucky Complaint, which is virtually identical to the Complaint in the instant case, is currently pending Johnson's compliance with the Pre-Filing Order in the New York Proceeding.

  3. Johnson v. Mossow

    Civ. 24-00394 LEK-WRP (D. Haw. Nov. 1, 2024)

    “A court should examine a plaintiff's claim to determine whether the interests of justice require transfer instead of dismissal.” Rosiere v. United States, CIVIL NO. 1600260 HG-RLP, 2016 WL 3408848, at *2 (D. Hawai'i June 1, 2016) (citing King v. Russell, 963 F.2d 1301, 1305 (9th Cir. 1992)).Although this Court acknowledges that a pro se plaintiff is generally entitled to notice of the defects in his complaint and the opportunity to amend, see Lucas, 66 F.3d at 248, this Court concludes that dismissal without leave to amend is appropriate in this case because the Eastern District Complaint, which is virtually identical to the Complaint in the instant case, is currently pending Johnson's compliance with the Pre-Filing Order in the Northern District Proceeding. Moreover, the Northern District of New York is a proper venue for this action because it is the district in which the events at issue in this case occurred.

  4. Johnson v. Wendys Rest.

    Civ. 24-00398 LEK-RT (D. Haw. Nov. 1, 2024)

    “A court should examine a plaintiff's claim to determine whether the interests of justice require transfer instead of dismissal.” Rosiere v. United States, CIVIL NO. 1600260 HG-RLP, 2016 WL 3408848, at *2 (D. Hawai'i June 1, 2016) (citing King v. Russell, 963 F.2d 1301, 1305 (9th Cir. 1992)).Although this Court acknowledges that a pro se plaintiff is generally entitled to notice of the defects in his complaint and the opportunity to amend, see Lucas, 66 F.3d at 248, this Court concludes that dismissal without leave to amend is appropriate in this case because the California Complaint, which is virtually identical to the Complaint in the instant case, is currently pending Johnson's compliance with the Pre-Filing Order in the New York Proceeding.

  5. Ballering v. All State Attorney Generals & Lemon Law Dep'ts

    CIV. NO. 20-00530 LEK-RT (D. Haw. Jan. 29, 2021)

    "A court should examine a plaintiff's claim to determine whether the interests of justice require transfer instead of dismissal." Rosiere v. United States, CIVIL NO. 16-00260 HG-RLP, 2016 WL 3408848, at *2 (D. Hawai`i June 1, 2016) (citing King v. Russell, 963 F.2d 1301, 1305 (9th Cir. 1992)), report and recommendation adopted as modified on other grounds, 2016 WL 3440566 (June 20, 2016). In making that determination, this Court would consider the fact that Ballering has filed the same or similar actions in multiple district courts.

  6. Fitten v. McCarthy

    CIV. NO. 19-00520 LEK-WRP (D. Haw. May. 26, 2020)   Cited 3 times

    "A court should examine a plaintiff's claim to determine whether the interests of justice require transfer instead of dismissal." Rosiere v. United States, CIVIL NO. 16-00260 HG-RLP, 2016 WL 3408848, at *2 (D. Hawai`i June 1, 2016) (citing King v. Russell, 963 F.2d 1301, 1305 (9th Cir. 1992)), report and recommendation adopted as modified on other grounds, 2016 WL 3440566 (June 20, 2016). DISCUSSION

  7. Emrit v. Nat'l Football League

    CIV. NO. 20-00008 LEK-WRP (D. Haw. Feb. 28, 2020)

    "A court should examine a plaintiff's claim to determine whether the interests of justice require transfer instead of dismissal." Rosiere v. United States, CIVIL NO. 16-00260 HG-RLP, 2016 WL 3408848, at *2 (D. Hawai`i June 1, 2016) (citing King v. Russell, 963 F.2d 1301, 1305 (9th Cir. 1992)), report and recommendation adopted as modified on other grounds, 2016 WL 3440566 (June 20, 2016). Based on the allegations of the Complaint, it does not appear that venue is appropriate in the District of Hawai`i pursuant to either § 1391(b)(1) or (2). Further, in light of the analysis in Discussion Section I, venue in the District of Hawai`i is not appropriate under § 1391(b)(3) because none of the Defendants is subject to personal jurisdiction in this district.

  8. Downey v. United States

    CIV. NO. 19-00406 LEK-WRP (D. Haw. Aug. 30, 2019)   Cited 8 times

    "A court should examine a plaintiff's claim to determine whether the interests of justice require transfer instead of dismissal." Rosiere v. United States, CIVIL NO. 16-00260 HG-RLP, 2016 WL 3408848, at *2 (D. Hawai`i June 1, 2016) (citing King v. Russell, 963 F.2d 1301, 1305 (9th Cir. 1992)), report and recommendation adopted as modified on other grounds, 2016 WL 3440566 (June 20, 2016). Plaintiff has filed similar cases in several other districts, many of which have been dismissed.

  9. Emrit v. Soros

    CIV. NO. 19-00125 LEK-RLP (D. Haw. Apr. 30, 2019)   Cited 2 times
    Dismissing Emrit's complaint sua sponte pursuant to § 1915(e)(B) for failure to state a claim

    "A court should examine a plaintiff's claim to determine whether the interests of justice require transfer instead of dismissal." Rosiere v. United States, CIVIL NO. 16-00260 HG-RLP, 2016 WL 3408848, at *2 (D. Hawai`i June 1, 2016) (citing King v. Russell, 963 F.2d 1301, 1305 (9th Cir. 1992)), report and recommendation adopted as modified, 2016 WL 3440566 (June 20, 2016). Because it appears that Plaintiff has filed a similar case in several other districts, including the United States District Court for the District of Alaska, under Emrit v. Soros, et al., CV 19-00003 ("Alaska Action"), this Court declines to find that it is necessary to transfer this case elsewhere.

  10. Emrit v. Desert Parkway Behavioral Hosp.

    CIV. NO. 18-00435 LEK (D. Haw. Jan. 29, 2019)

    "A court should examine a plaintiff's claim to determine whether the interests of justice require transfer instead of dismissal." Rosiere v. United States, CIVIL NO. 16-00260 HG-RLP, 2016 WL 3408848, at *2 (D. Hawai`i June 1, 2016) (citing King v. Russell, 963 F.2d 1301, 1305 (9th Cir. 1992)), report and recommendation adopted as modified, 2016 WL 3440566 (June 20, 2016). This Court has examined Plaintiff's claims, and it appears that Plaintiff has filed complaints with other district courts alleging claims identical to those alleged in the instant matter.