Searching over 5,500,000 cases.


searching
Buy This Entire Record For $7.95

Download the entire decision to receive the complete text, official citation,
docket number, dissents and concurrences, and footnotes for this case.

Learn more about what you receive with purchase of this case.

Jones v. Credit Solutions

June 30, 2010

MICHELE JONES, PLAINTIFF,
v.
CREDIT SOLUTIONS, DEFENDANT.



The opinion of the court was delivered by: Charles R. Breyer United States District Judge

ORDER GRANTING MOTION TO TRANSFER AND DENYING MOTION TO DISMISS

Plaintiff Jones brings this action seeking monetary damages and declaratory relief for Defendant's alleged violations of the Fair Debt Collection Practices Act and the Rosenthal Fair Debt Collection Practices Act.

Now before this Court is Defendant's motion to dismiss for improper venue, or in the alternative, to transfer this matter to the Southern District of California in San Diego.

Venue is proper in the Southern District. In order to encourage the speedy resolution of this matter, the motion to transfer is GRANTED. The motion to dismiss is DENIED.

BACKGROUND

As this case comes before this Court on a motion to dismiss, the following recitation of facts is taken entirely from the allegations in the Complaint.

On several occasions, Defendant made calls to Plaintiff's home in San Pablo in an attempt to collect a debt allegedly owed by Plaintiff. Compl. ¶¶ 12-14. Plaintiff alleges that venue is proper pursuant to 28 U.S.C. 1391(b)(1).*fn1 Id. ¶ 5.

On January 15, Plaintiff filed this lawsuit against Defendant, Credit Solutions Corp. ("Defendant"), alleging violations of the Fair Debt Collections Act and the Rosenthal Fair Debt Collection Practices Act. Id. ¶¶ 1, 2.

Plaintiff resides in San Pablo, California. Id. ¶ 7. Defendant is a national company with its headquarters in San Diego, California. Id. ¶ 10.

DISCUSSION

A. Legal Standard

i. Motion to Dismiss for Improper Venue

Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 12(b)(3) provides that if an action is brought in the wrong court, a defendant can move to dismiss the action for improper venue. In deciding such a motion, the pleadings need not be accepted as true and the court may consider facts outside the pleadings. Murphy v. Schneider Nat'l, Inc., 326 F.3d 1122, 1137 (9th Cir. 2004).

In order for this Court to be the proper venue for this matter under 28 U.S.C. § 1391(b)(1), Plaintiff must allege that Defendant "resides" in the District of Northern California.*fn2 Because Defendant is a corporation, it "resides" in any judicial district in which it is subject to personal ...


Buy This Entire Record For $7.95

Download the entire decision to receive the complete text, official citation,
docket number, dissents and concurrences, and footnotes for this case.

Learn more about what you receive with purchase of this case.