Macomber
(PS) Hollywood v. Macomber
Opinion
Trial Court Opinion
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA 10 AROGANT HOLLYWOOD, Case No. 2:24-cv-03351-DAD-CSK Plaintiff, v. ORDER TRANSFERRING CASE JEFFREY A. MACOMBER, et al., Defendants. 16 Plaintiff Arogant Hollywood is proceeding in this action pro se and has paid the filing fee.1 For the reasons outlined below, the Court will transfer this action to the United States District Court for the Central District of California because venue is not proper in this district. I. VENUE The general federal venue statute pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1391(b) 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
This matter proceeds before the undersigned pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 636, Fed. R. Civ. P. 72, and Local Rule 302(c). An order addressing venue transfer does not address the merits of the case and is a non-dispositive matter that…