Shaun Garland v. A. K. Skribner

FILED NOT FOR PUBLICATION OCT 05 2010 MOLLY C. DWYER, CLERK UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS U .S. C O U R T OF APPE ALS FOR THE NINTH CIRCUIT SHAUN DARNELL GARLAND, No. 09-15079 Plaintiff - Appellant, D.C. No. 1:06-cv-00198-OWW- GSA v. A. K. SKRIBNER; et al., MEMORANDUM * Defendants - Appellees. Appeal from the United States District Court for the Eastern District of California Oliver W. Wanger, District Judge, Presiding Submitted September 22, 2010 ** Before: WALLACE, HAWKINS, and THOMAS, Circuit Judges. The district court properly dismissed Shaun Darnell Garland’s (“Garland”) claims against defendant Lewis, without prejudice, so that Garland could re-file them in the proper venue. See 28 U.S.C. § 1391(b) (“A civil action . . . may . . . be brought only in . . . a judicial district in which a substantial part of the events or * This disposition is not appropriate for publication and is not precedent except as provided by 9th Cir. R. 36-3. ** The panel unanimously concludes this case is suitable for decision without oral argument. See Fed. R. App. P. 34(a)(2). omissions giving rise to the claim occurred, or a substantial part of property that is the subject of the action is situated . . .”); see also Fed. R. Civ. P. 21 (permitting the court, on just terms, to drop a party). Contrary to Garland’s contention, the district court did not err by denying his motion to transfer him from state to federal custody because he had already been transferred to a different state prison. See Dilley v. Gunn, 64 F.3d 1365, 1368 (9th Cir. 1995). Garland’s remaining contentions are unpersuasive. AFFIRMED. 2 09-15079