1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
9 EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA
10
11 JEREMY M. TOWNER, 1:25-cv-000926-SKO (HC)
12 Petitioner,
ORDER TRANSFERRING CASE TO THE
13 v. UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR
THE NORTHERN DISTRICT OF
14 SILVA, CALIFORNIA
15 Respondent.
16
17 Petitioner, a state prisoner proceeding pro se, has filed a habeas corpus action pursuant to
18 28 U.S.C. § 2254, together with a request to proceed in forma pauperis pursuant to 28 U.S.C.
19 § 1915.
20 The federal venue statute requires that a civil action, other than one based on diversity
21 jurisdiction, be brought only in “(1) a judicial district where any defendant resides, if all defendants
22 are residents of the State in which the district is located, (2) a judicial district in which a substantial
23 part of the events or omissions giving rise to the claim occurred, or a substantial part of the property
24 that is the subject of the action is situated, or (3) if there is no district in which an action may
25 otherwise be brought as provided in this section, any judicial district in which any defendant is
26 subject to the court’s personal jurisdiction with respect to such action.” 28 U.S.C. § 1391(b).
27
28
1 Petitioner is challenging a conviction from Santa Cruz County, which is in the Northern
2 District of California. Therefore, the petition should have been filed in the United States District
3 Court for the Northern District of California. In the interest of justice, a federal court may transfer
4 a case filed in the wrong district to the correct district. See 28 U.S.C. § 1406(a); Starnes v. McGuire,
5 512 F.2d 918, 932 (D.C. Cir. 1974).
6 Accordingly, IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that this matter is transferred to the United States
7 District Court for the Northern District of California.
8
IT IS SO ORDERED.
9
10 Dated: July 31, 2025 /s/ Sheila K. Oberto .
UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
Not legal advice. These patterns come from public court records, not ratings of judges as people. They may reflect the types of cases a judge handles, local procedures or other factors, and they do not account for the facts of any individual case. Past patterns do not predict future rulings. Records can be incomplete, months behind current activity, or matched to the wrong person; sealed and confidential cases are not included. Use this as one piece of information, never the sole basis for legal strategy or a recusal motion. Full disclaimer: https://judgefinder.io/legal/disclaimer Read the full disclaimer.