Searching over 5,500,000 cases.


searching
Buy This Entire Record For $7.95

Official citation and/or docket number and footnotes (if any) for this case available with purchase.

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

Alford v. Kelly

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA


October 12, 2010

RICKEY LOUIS ALFORD, PLAINTIFF,
v.
CRIST KELLY, ET AL., DEFENDANTS.

DATED: October 8, 2010

ORDER AND FINDINGS & RECOMMENDATIONS

Plaintiff, a Los Angeles county inmate proceeding pro se, has filed a civil rights action pursuant to 42 U.S.C. § 1983.*fn1 Because plaintiff's claims arose from incidents and events that allegedly occurred in Los Angeles County, venue is not with this court. See 28 U.S.C. § 1391(b). However, rather than transfer this case to the U.S. District Court for the Central District of California, the court will instead recommend that this action be dismissed without prejudice.

Title 28 U.S.C. § 1406(a) provides that where a case is filed laying venue in the wrong district the court "shall dismiss, or if it may be in the interest of justice, transfer such case to any district . . . in which it could have been brought." Here, the interest of justice does not call for the transfer of this action. Plaintiff's complaint is made up of rambling allegations concerning his criminal proceedings, alleged interference with his automobile repair business, defendants' alleged advocacy of racial hate crimes, and claims of racism in the oil industry. Plaintiff identifies as defendants State Senator Kelly, Assemblyman Renner, and Sheriff Deputies Tweedy and Crosby. Plaintiff's complaint is frivolous on its face and defective.*fn2

Accordingly, IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that the Clerk of the Court is directed to randomly assign a United States District Judge to this action.

Also, IT IS HEREBY RECOMMENDED that this action be dismissed without prejudice as improperly filed in this court. See 28 U.S.C. § 1406(a).

These findings and recommendations are submitted to the United States District Judge assigned to the case, pursuant to the provisions of 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(l). Within twenty-one days after being served with these findings and recommendations, plaintiff may file written objections with the court. The document should be captioned "Objections to Magistrate Judge's Findings and Recommendations." Plaintiff is advised that failure to file objections within the specified time may waive the right to appeal the District Court's order. Martinez v. Ylst, 951 F.2d 1153 (9th Cir. 1991).


Buy This Entire Record For $7.95

Official citation and/or docket number and footnotes (if any) for this case available with purchase.

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