Opinion
1:11-cv-01524-MJS (HC)
09-12-2011
MICHAEL VIELBIG, Petitioner, v. C. GIBSON, Respondent.
ORDER TRANSFERRING CASE TO THE
SACRAMENTO DIVISION OF THE
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT,
EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA
Petitioner, a state prisoner proceeding pro se, has filed a habeas corpus action pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 2254, together with a request to proceed in forma pauperis pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1915.
Venue for a habeas action is proper in either the district of confinement or the district of conviction. 28 U.S.C. § 2241(d). The district court for the district wherein such an application is filed in the exercise of its discretion and in furtherance of justice may transfer the application to the other district court for hearing and determination. Id.
The petitioner is challenging a conviction from Shasta County, which is part of the Sacramento Division of the United States District Court for the Eastern District of California. Therefore, the petition should have been filed in the Sacramento Division. Local Rule 120(d).
Pursuant to Local Rule 120(f), a civil action which has not been commenced in the proper court may, on the court's own motion, be transferred to the proper court. Therefore, this action will be transferred to the Sacramento Division. This court will not rule on petitioner's request to proceed in forma pauperis.
Good cause appearing, IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that:
1. This Court has not ruled on petitioner's request to proceed in forma pauperis.
2. This action is transferred to the United States District Court for the Eastern District of California sitting in Sacramento; and
3. All future filings shall reference the new Sacramento case number assigned and shall be filed at:
United States District Court
Eastern District of California
501 "I" Street, Suite 4-200
Sacramento, CA 95814
IT IS SO ORDERED.
____________
UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE