Filed: Dec. 09, 2016
Latest Update: Dec. 09, 2016
Summary: ORDER FOR TRANSFER ROBERT L. HINKLE , District Judge . In this case the plaintiff asserts claims arising from his enrollment as a student at Grand Canyon University. The university's campus is in Arizona. The plaintiff took classes on line from his residence in Florida and participated in an internship in Florida. The case is before the court on the magistrate judge's report and recommendation, ECF No. 41, and the objections, ECF No. 48. I have reviewed de novo the issues raised by the ob
Summary: ORDER FOR TRANSFER ROBERT L. HINKLE , District Judge . In this case the plaintiff asserts claims arising from his enrollment as a student at Grand Canyon University. The university's campus is in Arizona. The plaintiff took classes on line from his residence in Florida and participated in an internship in Florida. The case is before the court on the magistrate judge's report and recommendation, ECF No. 41, and the objections, ECF No. 48. I have reviewed de novo the issues raised by the obj..
More
ORDER FOR TRANSFER
ROBERT L. HINKLE, District Judge.
In this case the plaintiff asserts claims arising from his enrollment as a student at Grand Canyon University. The university's campus is in Arizona. The plaintiff took classes on line from his residence in Florida and participated in an internship in Florida.
The case is before the court on the magistrate judge's report and recommendation, ECF No. 41, and the objections, ECF No. 48. I have reviewed de novo the issues raised by the objections.
The report and recommendation concludes that venue is improper in this district and that, in any event, the case should be transferred to the District of Arizona under 28 U.S.C. § 1404(a). Under that statute, "[f]or the convenience of parties and witnesses, in the interest of justice, a district court may transfer any civil action to any other district or division where it might have been brought . . . ."
This action could properly have been brought in the District of Arizona. And transfer to that district will serve the convenience of most of the parties and witnesses and the interest of justice. This is especially so in light of the plaintiff's decision to name as defendants not just the university but also nine individual university employees, all of whom apparently live and work in Arizona. The plaintiff does not allege that the individual defendants did anything in Florida.
Factors informing a court's application of § 1404(a) include relevant public and private interests. See generally Robinson v. Giarmarco & Bill, P.C., 74 F.3d 253, 260 (11th Cir. 1996); Jumara v. State Farm Ins. Co., 55 F.3d 873, 879-80 (3d Cir. 1995); 15 Charles Alan Wright & Arthur R. Miller, Federal Practice & Procedure: Jurisdiction §§ 3847-3854 (3d ed. 2011). I conclude, as a matter of discretion, that this case should be transferred to the District of Arizona.
For these reasons,
IT IS ORDERED:
The report and recommendation is accepted. This case is transferred to the United States District Court for the District of Arizona, Phoenix Division. The clerk must take all steps necessary to effect the transfer.
SO ORDERED.
