{"id":342,"date":"2026-01-05T12:00:00","date_gmt":"2026-01-05T12:00:00","guid":{"rendered":"https:\/\/california.shuster.info\/?p=342"},"modified":"2026-01-05T12:00:00","modified_gmt":"2026-01-05T12:00:00","slug":"crossley-diaz-garcia-cd-cal-osc-venue-transfer-section-1983","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/california.shuster.info\/?p=342","title":{"rendered":"Crossley v. Diaz Garcia \u2014 C.D. Cal. Issues OSC on Venue Transfer of Section 1983 Suit Over Kern Valley Prison Incident"},"content":{"rendered":"
\n
\n
Case<\/dt>\n
Crossley v. Diaz Garcia<\/dd>\n
Court<\/dt>\n
U.S. District Court \u2014 Central District of California<\/dd>\n
Date Decided<\/dt>\n
2026-01-05<\/dd>\n
Docket No.<\/dt>\n
5:25-cv-03618<\/dd>\n
Status<\/dt>\n
Unreported \/ Non-Citable<\/dd>\n
Topics<\/dt>\n
Federal venue under 28 U.S.C. \u00a7 1391(b); transfer in interest of justice under \u00a7 1406(a); pro se prisoner \u00a7 1983 suits<\/dd>\n<\/dl>\n<\/div>\n

Background<\/h2>\n

Pro se plaintiff Robert Lamount Crossley, a state prisoner currently incarcerated at the California Institute for Men in Chino, filed a 42 U.S.C. \u00a7 1983 civil-rights complaint against five correctional officers alleging constitutional violations that occurred at Kern Valley State Prison in Delano, California, on November 24, 2025. The named officers \u2014 J. Flores, Garcia, K. Garcia, S. Lopez, and Diaz Garcia \u2014 were all alleged to be located at Kern Valley State Prison, which sits in Kern County and falls within the geographic boundaries of the Eastern District of California, not the Central District where Crossley filed his suit.<\/p>\n

The Court’s Holding<\/h2>\n

Magistrate Judge Daniel S. Roberts issued an order to show cause why the case should not be transferred to the Eastern District of California. The court applied the federal venue statute, 28 U.S.C. \u00a7 1391(b), which limits civil actions to (1) a district where any defendant resides if all defendants reside in the state, (2) a district where a substantial part of the events occurred, or (3) a district where any defendant is subject to personal jurisdiction if no other district works. Because all named defendants worked at \u2014 and the entire incident occurred at \u2014 Kern Valley State Prison in Kern County, none of the venue prongs supported filing in the Central District.<\/p>\n

The court explained that under 28 U.S.C. \u00a7 1406(a) and Ravelo Monegro v. Rosa, a federal court may transfer a complaint filed in the wrong venue to the proper district “in the interest of justice.” Crossley was given until January 20, 2026, to either consent to transfer or explain why venue is proper in the Central District. The court warned that failure to timely respond would result in transfer to the Eastern District, and provided a Notice of Dismissal form should Crossley wish to abandon the action.<\/p>\n

Key Takeaways<\/h2>\n