Austin v. State of California, San Francisco Superior Court
Opinion
Trial Court Opinion
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA
GREGORY A. AUSTIN, Case No. 1:20-cv-00180-NONE-SKO
Plaintiff,
ORDER TRANSFERRING CASE
v.
STATE OF CALIFORNIA, SAN
17 FRANCISCO SUPERIOR COURT, et al., 18 Defendants. _____________________________________/
20 On February 3, 2020, Plaintiff Gregory A. Austin, proceeding pro se, filed a complaint 21 against Defendants “State of California, San Francisco Superior Court,” and six judges of the San 22 Francisco Superior Court, along with an application to proceed in forma pauperis. (Docs. 1, 2.) 23 The complaint purports to petition for a writ of habeas corpus under 28 U.S.C. § 2254, but alleges 24 claims related to a civil restraining order entered in “divorce proceedings” and does not allege that 25 Plaintiff is incarcerated, on probation, or on parole, and thus it appears the case is properly 26 designated as a regular civil action. (See generally Doc. 1.) 27 28 The federal venue statute requires that a civil action, other than one based on diversity jurisdiction, be brought only in “(1) a judicial district in which any…