Court, Explained
U.S. Federal District Courts
Back to docket
N.D. Cal.Procedural orderFiled June 25, 2020

Thompson v. Razavi

Judge
Edward Davila
Docket
5:20-cv-04292
Court
U.S. District Court · Northern District of California
Pages
2
Civil RightsSection 1983Pro SeCivil Procedure
In one sentence

Thompson v. Razavi: Judge Barnes transferred the prisoner’s civil-rights case to the Northern District of California for proper venue.

Who this affects

John William Thompson’s case was transferred from the Eastern District of California to the Northern District of California; the order did not decide the claims’ merits.

What happened

In John William Thompson v. Eric Razavi, D.D.S., et al., a state prisoner sued four doctors under a federal civil-rights law and requested permission to proceed without paying filing fees. The case was filed in the Eastern District of California.

Most of Thompson’s claims concerned three doctors at the Correctional Training Facility, involving an alleged failure to diagnose and treat an oral infection. The facility is in Monterey County, which is in the Northern District of California. A separate claim involved a doctor at another facility and was not a substantial part of the complaint.

The court transferred the case to the Northern District of California because that was the proper federal district for the main events. Judge Orah Barnes issued the order on June 24, 2020.

The detailed version

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

Case
Thompson v. Razavi · No. 5:20-cv-04292
Judge
Edward Davila
Date
June 25, 2020

Background

John William Thompson, identified as a state prisoner proceeding without a lawyer, filed a civil-rights action under 42 U.S.C. § 1983 and an application to proceed without paying the filing fee. He named four defendants: three doctors from the Correctional Training Facility (CTF) and one doctor from the California Health Care Facility (CHCF).

Thompson’s claims primarily concerned the CTF doctors’ alleged failure to diagnose and treat an oral infection that spread throughout his body. He also alleged that the CHCF doctor failed to reorder an MRI.

Venue Analysis

The court applied the federal venue statute, 28 U.S.C. § 1391(b). That statute identifies districts where a civil action may be filed, including a district where a substantial part of the events giving rise to the claims occurred. The court found that the claim involving the CHCF doctor was not a substantial part of the complaint. Because CTF is in Monterey County, within the Northern District of California, the court determined that the complaint should have been filed there.

Ruling

The court ordered that the matter be transferred to the United States District Court for the Northern District of California under 28 U.S.C. § 1406(a), which permits transfer of a case filed in the wrong district when doing so serves the interests of justice. The order did not decide the merits of Thompson’s civil-rights claims or state a ruling on his filing-fee application. Judge Orah Barnes signed the order.

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.