Solorio v. Newsom

— 1 — — 2 — — 3 — — 4 — — 5 — 6 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT — 7 — 8 NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA — 9 — — 10 — 11 GUILLERMO SOLORIO, Case No. 24-cv-04690-JSW 12 Plaintiff, ORDER OF TRANSFER v. — 13 — 14 GAVIN NEWSOM, et al., Defendants. — 15 — 16 Petitioner, a California prisoner proceeding without an attorney at the California Medical 17 Facility in Vacaville, California, filed a petition for a writ of mandamus to stop his transfer from 18 state to federal custody. CMF is in Solano County, which lies within the venue of the Eastern 19 District of California. See 28 U.S.C. § 84 . As the petition concerns Petitioner’s confinement, the 20 Eastern District, where Petitioner is confined, is the more convenient forum.1 Cf. Dunne v. 21 Henman, 875 F.2d 244, 249-50 (9th Cir. 1989) (suggesting that preferred forum for federal habeas 22 petitions is district where petitioner is confined); Chatman-Bey v. Thornburgh, 864 F.2d 804 , 814 23 (D.C. Cir. 1988) (“venue considerations may, and frequently will, argue in favor of adjudication 24 of the habeas claim in the jurisdiction where the habeas petitioner is confined); cf. also Muth v. 25 Fondren, 676 F.3d 815, 818 (9th Cir. 2012) (“§ 2241 petitions must be filed in the district where — 26 — — 27 — 1 Although Petitioner was convicted in this district, he does not challenge his conviction or 1 the petitioner is confined”). Accordingly, in the interest of justice, this case is TRANSFERRED 2 to the United States District Court for the Eastern District of California. 3 The Clerk shall transfer this matter forthwith. 4 IT IS SO ORDERED. 5 Dated: September 4, 2024 a) flan □□□□□□ i / JERFREY §./WAITE 8 United dates District Judge — 9 — — 10 — — 11 — a 12 — 14 — — 15 — — 16 — = 17 Z 18 — 19 — — 20 — — 21 — — 22 — — 23 — — 24 — — 25 — — 26 — — 27 — — 28 —