1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 9 FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA 10 11 JOHN MARCUS ZINMAN, No. 2:24-cv-2643 DMC P 12 Plaintiff, 13 v. ORDER 14 RYAN WRIGHT, et al., 15 Defendants. 16 17 Plaintiff, a state prisoner proceeding pro se, has filed a civil rights action pursuant 18 to

. Plaintiff has neither filed an application to proceed in forma pauperis 19 pursuant to

nor paid the filing fee for this action. 20 The federal venue statute provides that a civil action “may be brought in (1) a 21 judicial district in which any defendant resides, if all defendants are residents of the State in 22 which the district is located, (2) a judicial district in which a substantial part of the events or 23 omissions giving rise to the claim occurred, or a substantial part of property that is the subject of 24 the action is situated, or (3) if there is no district in which an action may otherwise be brought as 25 provided in this action, any judicial district in which any defendant is subject to the court’s 26 personal jurisdiction with respect to such action.”

(b). 27 / / / 28 / / / ] In this case, the defendant(s) are located, and the claim arose in Ventura County, 2 || which is in the Central District of California. Therefore, Plaintiff’s claim should have been filed 3 || in the United States District Court for the Central District of California. In the interest of justice, 4 || a federal court may transfer a complaint filed in the wrong district to the correct district. See 5 |

(a); Starnes v. McGuire,

(D.C. Cir. 1974). 6 Accordingly, IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that this matter is transferred to the 7 || United States District Court for the Central District of California. 8 9 | Dated: October 17, 2024 Ss..c0_, 10 DENNIS M. COTA 11 UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28