UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
FOR THE DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA
BYRON SMITH, :
:
Petitioner, :
:
v. : Civil Action No.: 10-0464 (RMU)
:
FEDERAL BUREAU OF PRISONS, :
:
Respondent. :
MEMORANDUM ORDER
TRANSFERRING THIS CASE TO THE
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE DISTRICT OF ARIZONA
The petitioner, who is currently incarcerated at the United States Penitentiary in Tucson,
Arizona, alleges that the Federal Bureau of Prisons (“BOP”) has failed to award him
institutional, educational and meritorious good time credit toward service of his sentence. See
generally Pet. Had the BOP properly awarded him credit, the petitioner contends, his term of
imprisonment would be “greatly reduce[d].” Id. at 8.
Habeas actions are subject to jurisdictional limitations. See, e.g., Braden v. 30th Judicial
Circuit Ct. of Ky., 410 U.S. 484, 494 (1973). The proper respondent in a habeas corpus action is
the petitioner’s warden. Rumsfeld v. Padilla, 542 U.S. 426, 434-35 (2004); Blair-Bey v. Quick,
151 F.3d 1036, 1039 (D.C. Cir. 1998) (citing Chatman-Bey v. Thornburgh, 864 F.2d 804, 810
(D.C. Cir. 1988)). “[A] district court may not entertain a habeas petition involving present
physical custody unless the respondent custodian is within its territorial jurisdiction.” Stokes v.
U.S. Parole Comm’n, 374 F.3d 1235, 1239 (D.C. Cir. 2004). Because the petitioner in this case
is incarcerated in the District of Arizona, the court will transfer this matter to that district. See
id.
Accordingly, it is this 7th day of May, 2010, hereby
ORDERED that this action is TRANSFERRED to the United States District Court for
the District of Arizona.
SO ORDERED.
RICARDO M. URBINA
United States District Judge
2