(PC) Milo v. Schubert

2:19-cv-00176 | E.D. Cal. | Jan 29, 2019

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA SEMANU MILO, Case No. 1:19-cv-00117-DAD-SAB Plaintiff, ORDER TRANSFERING CASE TO THE SACRAMENTO DIVISION OF THE v. EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA ANNA MARIE SCHUBERT, et al., Defendants. Plaintiff Semanu Milo filed this action proceeding pro se on January 25, 2019, against District Attorney Anna Marie Schubert, Deputy District Attorneys Andrew Smith and Morgan Gire, Chief Deputy Attonrey Stehen J. Grippi, and Sheriff Scott Jones based on the collection and handling of evidence in a criminal case against him in the Sacramento County.

Pursuant to the Local Rules of the Eastern District of California, “all civil and criminal actions and proceedings of every nature and kind cognizable in the United States District Court for the Eastern District of California arising in Alpine, Amador, Butte, Colusa, El Dorado, Glenn, Lassen, Modoc, Mono, Nevada, Placer, Plumas, Sacramento, San Joaquin, Shasta, Sierra, Siskiyou, Solano, Sutter, Tehama, Trinity, Yolo, and Yuba counties shall be commenced in the United States District Court sitting Sacramento, California, and in Redding, California, or other designated places within those counties as the Court shall designate when appropriate for Magistrate Judge criminal proceedings.” L.R. 120(d).

1 The incidents alleged in the complaint took place in Sacramento which is in Sacramento County; therefore, this action would properly be filed in the Sacramento Division of the Eastern District of California. Local Rule 120(f), provides that a civil action which has not been commenced in the proper court may, on the court’s own motion, be transferred to the proper court. Therefore, this action will be transferred to the Sacramento Division of the Eastern District of California. This court will not rule on Plaintiff's request to proceed in forma pauperis.

Good cause appearing, IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that: 1. This action is transferred to the Sacramento Division of the United States District
Court for the Eastern District of California; and 2. This court has not ruled on plaintiff's request to proceed in forma pauperis.

IT IS SO ORDERED.

Dated: January 28, 2019

UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE

2