The opinion
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8 IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
9 FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA
10
11 JOSEPH ANTHONY BROWN, 1:11-cv-01586-GSA-(HC)
12 ORDER TRANSFERRING CASE TO THE
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR
13 Petitioner, THE DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA
14 vs.
15 U.S.A.,
16 Respondent.
17 /
18
19 Petitioner, a state prisoner proceeding pro se, has filed a habeas corpus action pursuant to 28
20 U.S.C. § 2254.
21 The federal venue statute requires that a civil action, other than one based on diversity
22 jurisdiction, be brought only in “(1) a judicial district where any defendant resides, if all defendants reside
23 in the same state, (2) a judicial district in which a substantial part of the events or omissions giving rise
24 to the claim occurred, or a substantial part of the property that is the subject of the action is situated, or
25 (3) a judicial district in which any defendant may be found, if there is no district in which the action may
26 otherwise be brought.” 28 U.S.C. § 1391(b).
27 In this case, the petitioner is challenging a conviction from Washington D.C. Superior Court,
28 which is in the District of Columbia. Therefore, the petition should have been filed in the United States
-1-
1 District Court for the District of Columbia. In the interest of justice, a federal court may transfer a case
2 filed in the wrong district to the correct district. See 28 U.S.C. § 1406(a); Starnes v. McGuire, 512 F.2d
3 918, 932 (D.C. Cir. 1974).
4 Accordingly, IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that this matter is transferred to the United States
5 District Court for the District of Columbia.
6 IT IS SO ORDERED.
7 Dated: September 26, 2011 /s/ Gary S. Austin
23ehd0 UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
-2-