ORDER DENYING MOTION TO TRANSFER WITHOUT PREJUDICE

Re: Dkt. No. 2

JOSEPH C. SPERO, Chief Magistrate Judge.

Plaintiff erroneously filed her Complaint in this District and brings a motion to transfer the case to the Central District of California ("Motion"). While it apparent from the caption of the Complaint and the Motion that Plaintiff intended to file the complaint in the Central District, the Motion cites no authority that permits transfer under these circumstances. This Court may transfer an action to another district only if such a transfer is justified under applicable statutory authority. Thus, to establish that a transfer is appropriate under 28 U.S.C. § 1404(a), Plaintiff must show that this action "might have been brought" in the Central District and that transfer is "[f]or the convenience of parties and witnesses, in the interest of justice." Alternatively, the Court may order that an action be transferred to a district "where it might have been brought or to any district or division to which all parties have consented" when the case has been filed "in the wrong division or district" and transfer is "in the interest of justice." 28 U.S.C. § 1406(a). The mere fact that Plaintiff intended that this action be filed in the Central District of California is not sufficient to establish that venue there is proper or that transfer is appropriate under the relevant statutes. Therefore, the Court DENIES the Motion without prejudice to refiling a motion that establishes that transfer is appropriate under applicable legal authority. Of course, Plaintiff does not require a court order to dismiss this action without prejudice and refile it in the Central District of California. See Fed. R. Civ. P. 41(a)(1)(a) (providing that a plaintiff may dismiss an action without prejudice, without a court order, so long as she does so before the defendant files an answer or motion for summary judgment).

IT IS SO ORDERED.