Opinion
No. CIV S-08-2156 GGH P.
October 28, 2008
ORDER
Plaintiff, a state prisoner proceeding pro se, has filed a civil rights action pursuant to 42 U.S.C. § 1983.
The federal venue statute requires that a civil action, other than one based on diversity jurisdiction, be brought only in "(1) a judicial district where any defendant resides, if all defendants reside in the same State, (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) a judicial district in which any defendant may be found, if there is no district in which the action may otherwise be brought." 28 U.S.C. § 1391(b).
Venue of this action is technically appropriate in the Eastern District of California because the Director of the California Department of Corrections and Rehabilitation (hereafter "CDC Director") resides in this district. Nevertheless, the court is transferring this action to the Northern District of California pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1404(a) in the interests of justice for the following reasons.
It is clear that plaintiff is suing the CDC Director solely in a respondeat superior capacity. Additionally, plaintiff is seeking monetary damages only and has not stated a claim for injunctive relief. As such, the CDC Director is subject to be dismissed from this 42 U.S.C. § 1983 action. Fayle v. Stapley, 607 F.2d 858, 862 (9th Cir. 1979). Venue would then be improper in this district because no defendant would be found here. Venue would also be improper because the claims for which plaintiff seeks relief took place in the Northern District. Thus, it is appropriate that those claims be litigated in that district.
IT IS THEREFORE ORDERED that this action is transferred to the Northern District of California.