Court, Explained
U.S. Federal District Courts
Back to docket
N.D. Cal.Procedural orderFiled Mar. 10, 2026

Price v. Bustos

Judge
Beth Freeman
Docket
5:26-cv-02548
Court
U.S. District Court · Northern District of California
Pages
2
Civil ProcedurePro Se
In one sentence

In Price v. Bustos, Judge Riordan transferred Price’s civil-rights case to the Northern District of California because venue belonged there.

Who this affects

Eugene Leon Price’s civil-rights action was transferred from the Eastern District of California to the Northern District of California; the order did not resolve the claims against Bustos or the other defendants.

What happened

In Eugene Leon Price v. Bustos, Eugene Leon Price filed a civil-rights case under federal law against Bustos and other defendants.

The court said the claim arose in Monterey County, which is in the Northern District of California, so the case had been filed in the wrong district. It transferred the case rather than deciding the claims.

Judge Sean C. Riordan ordered the transfer to the Northern District of California under the federal venue statute.

The detailed version

For law students, journalists, and other readers who want the full reasoning

Case
Price v. Bustos · No. 5:26-cv-02548
Judge
Beth Freeman
Date
Mar. 10, 2026

Background

Eugene Leon Price, a state prisoner proceeding without a lawyer, filed a civil-rights action under 42 U.S.C. § 1983 against Bustos and other defendants. The opinion states that the claim arose in Monterey County, which is in the Northern District of California.

Venue

Federal law generally allows a civil case to be filed where a defendant resides, where a substantial part of the events occurred, or, in some circumstances, where a defendant is subject to the court’s authority. Because Price’s claim arose in Monterey County, the court determined that the case should have been filed in the Northern District of California.

Ruling

In an order dated March 9, 2026, Judge Sean C. Riordan transferred the matter to the United States District Court for the Northern District of California under 28 U.S.C. § 1406(a). The order addressed venue only and did not decide the merits of Price’s civil-rights claims.

The authoritative version

Read the full 2-page opinion on CourtListener, the free public archive maintained by the Free Law Project.

Open opinion PDF →
Summary written with AI assistance. See how summaries are made. Spot something wrong? Tell us.