Filed: Jan. 06, 2016
Latest Update: Jan. 06, 2016
Summary: ORDER DISMISSING ACTION FOR LACK OF JURISDICTION R. GARY KLAUSNER , District Judge . On December 18, 2015, Gabriel Flores-Delgado ("petitioner") filed a document in this Court entitled "Document in Support to THE RESPONDENTS FOR WRIT OF HABEAS CO[]RPUS" ("Doc. Support"). Petitioner is currently housed at a federal detention center in Eloy, Arizona, in the custody of Immigration and Customs Enforcement ("ICE"). (Doc. Support at 2). A review of the December 18, 2015, filing shows that petitio
Summary: ORDER DISMISSING ACTION FOR LACK OF JURISDICTION R. GARY KLAUSNER , District Judge . On December 18, 2015, Gabriel Flores-Delgado ("petitioner") filed a document in this Court entitled "Document in Support to THE RESPONDENTS FOR WRIT OF HABEAS CO[]RPUS" ("Doc. Support"). Petitioner is currently housed at a federal detention center in Eloy, Arizona, in the custody of Immigration and Customs Enforcement ("ICE"). (Doc. Support at 2). A review of the December 18, 2015, filing shows that petition..
More
ORDER DISMISSING ACTION FOR LACK OF JURISDICTION
R. GARY KLAUSNER, District Judge.
On December 18, 2015, Gabriel Flores-Delgado ("petitioner") filed a document in this Court entitled "Document in Support to THE RESPONDENTS FOR WRIT OF HABEAS CO[]RPUS" ("Doc. Support"). Petitioner is currently housed at a federal detention center in Eloy, Arizona, in the custody of Immigration and Customs Enforcement ("ICE"). (Doc. Support at 2). A review of the December 18, 2015, filing shows that petitioner seeks to have his currently pending habeas petition, initially filed in this Court (Case No. 2:15-cv-4227-RGK (PLA)) and now pending in the United States District Court for the District of Arizona (Case No. 2:15-cv-1273-JAT), transferred back to this Court. (Doc. Support at 2). In support of his request for a transfer, petitioner states the following reasons: (1) his immigration case is pending in the Ninth Circuit; and (2) the State of Arizona is violating his rights. (Id.).
A review of the docket in Case No. 2:15-cv-1273-JAT shows that, on June 5, 2015, petitioner initially filed his habeas petition pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 2241 in this Court. (Case No. 2:15-cv-1273-JAT, Docket No. 1; see also Case No. 2:15-cv-4227-RGK (PLA), Docket No. 1). On June 15, 2015, this Court transferred the matter to the United States District Court for the Eastern District of California on the basis that, at that time, petitioner was detained at a facility within the jurisdiction of the United States District Court for the Eastern District of California. (Case No. 2:15-cv-1273-JAT, Docket No. 3; see also Case No. 2:15-cv-4227-RGK (PLA), Docket No. 3). The Eastern District of California subsequently transferred the matter to the District of Arizona on the grounds that petitioner's bond denial took place in Arizona, and petitioner had been transferred back to the ICE facility in Eloy, Arizona.1 (Case No. 2:15-cv-1273-JAT, Docket No. 8). Petitioner's habeas petition in Case No. 2:15-cv-1273-JAT is currently pending in the District of Arizona.
In light of the above, the Court dismisses this action for lack of jurisdiction. Petitioner's habeas petition is currently pending in the District of Arizona and this Court has no authority to transfer the matter to this District. See, e.g., 28 U.S.C. § 1404(b). In any event, such a transfer would not be appropriate given that petitioner's habeas petition was already transferred on venue grounds from this Court to the Eastern District of California and then to the District of Arizona, and petitioner is still detained in a facility within the District of Arizona's jurisdiction. As explained in this Court's June 15, 2015, Order Transferring Action, the Central District of California is not the preferable forum given that there is no apparent connection between petitioner, his case, and the Central District of California.2 (Case No. 2:15-cv-1273-JAT, Docket No. 3 at 3; see also Case No. 2:15-cv-4227-RGK (PLA), Docket No. 3 at 3).
IT IS THEREFORE ORDERED that this action be dismissed for lack of jurisdiction.
IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that the Clerk of this Court serve a copy of this Order upon petitioner.
