(PC)Quintana v. Sanchez et al

1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
1
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA
IVAN QUINTANA,
Plaintiff,
v.
D. SANCHEZ, et al.,
Defendants.
No. 2:25-cv-3535 CSK P
ORDER
Plaintiff, a state prisoner proceeding pro se, has filed a civil rights action pursuant to
42 U.S.C. § 1983. Plaintiff has filed an application to proceed in forma pauperis pursuant to
28 U.S.C. § 1915.
The federal venue statute provides that a civil action “may be brought in (1) a judicial
district in which any defendant resides, if all defendants are residents of the State in which the
district is located, (2) a judicial district in which a substantial part of the events or omissions
giving rise to the claim occurred, or a substantial part of property that is the subject of the action
is situated, or (3) if there is no district in which an action may otherwise be brought as provided in
this action, any judicial district in which any defendant is subject to the court’s personal
jurisdiction with respect to such action.” 28 U.S.C. § 1391(b).
In this case, the claim arose in San Diego County, which is in the Southern District of
California. Therefore, plaintiff’s claim should have been filed in the United States District Court
Case 3:25-cv-03771-AJB-DEB Document 4 Filed 12/15/25 PageID.<pageID> Page
1 of 2

1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
2
for the Southern District of California. In the interest of justice, a federal court may transfer a
complaint filed in the wrong district to the correct district. See 28 U.S.C. § 1406(a); Starnes v.
McGuire, 512 F.2d 918, 932 (D.C. Cir. 1974).
Accordingly, IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that this matter is transferred to the United
States District Court for the Southern District of California.
Dated: December 15, 2025
/1quin3535.21
Case 3:25-cv-03771-AJB-DEB Document 4 Filed 12/15/25 PageID.<pageID> Page
2 of 2