Upon careful review of the record and appellate briefs, it clearly appears that no substantial question is presented for review.

Because appellant did not ask the district court for a transfer and made no showing that a transfer would be in the interest of justice, we conclude that the district court did not abuse its discretion in failing to order one. See 28 U.S.C. § 1406(a); Cote v. Wadel, 796 F.2d 981, 984 (7th Cir. 1986); see also Mulcahy v. Guertler, 416 F.Supp. 1083, 1086 (D.Mass. 1976).

Appellant's remaining arguments likewise are without merit: he had ample opportunity to respond to defendants' motion to dismiss; he never sought leave to amend his complaint, and, in any case, amendment would not cure the defects in venue; and neither defendants' credibility on the issue of service, nor appellant's failure to obtain a copy of the local rules, suggests to us any reason to reverse.

Affirmed. See 1st Cir. Loc. R. 27.1.