UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 

SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF FLORIDA 

Case No. 2:20-cv-23221-KMM

DREIJAH J. MUHAMMAD-ALI, 

Petitioner, 

v. 

“11TH CIR. U.S. DISTRICT [30303],” et al., 

ET AL., 

Respondents. 

 / 

ORDER ON REPORT AND RECOMMENDATION 

THIS CAUSE came before the Court upon Petitioner Dreijah J. Muhammad-Ali’s pro se

Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus. (“Pet.”) (ECF No. 1).1 The matter was referred to the 

Honorable Lisette M. Reid, United States Magistrate Judge, who issued a Report and 

Recommendation recommending that Petitioner’s Petition be TRANSFERRED to the United 

States District Court for the Middle District of Alabama. (“R&R”) (ECF No. 5). Petitioner filed 

objections. (“Objs.”) (ECF No. 6). The matter is now ripe for review. As set forth below, the 

Court ADOPTS the R&R. 

The Court may accept, reject, or modify, in whole or in part, the findings or 

recommendations made by the magistrate judge. 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1); Fed. R. Civ. P. 72(b)(3). 

The Court “must determine de novo any part of the magistrate judge’s disposition that has been 

properly objected to.” Fed. R. Civ. P. 72(b)(3). A de novo review is therefore required if a party 

files “a proper, specific objection” to a factual finding contained in the report. Macort v. Prem, 

1

 In the Petition, Petitioner does not identify whether he files the Petition under 28 U.S.C. 2241 or 

2254. Nevertheless, it is immaterial under which section Petitioner filed the Petition because, as 

set forth herein, the Court finds that it does not have jurisdiction to consider the Petition. 

Case 1:20-cv-23221-KMM Document 8 Entered on FLSD Docket 10/01/2020 Page 1 of 3
2 

Inc., 208 F. App’x 781, 784 (11th Cir. 2006). “It is critical that the objection be sufficiently 

specific and not a general objection to the report” to warrant de novo review. Id. 

As set forth in the R&R, Magistrate Judge Reid finds that the Court does not have 

jurisdiction over the Petition because Petitioner is confined in Bibb County, which is located in 

the Middle District of Alabama. R&R at 2. Accordingly, Magistrate Judge Reid recommends 

transferring the Petition to the Middle District of Alabama. 

“[F]or core habeas petitions challenging present physical confinement, jurisdiction lies in 

only one district: the district of confinement.” Rumsfeld v. Padilla, 542 U.S. 426, 443 (2004) 

“Whenever a civil action is filed in a court . . . and that court finds that there is a want of 

jurisdiction, the court shall, if it is in the interest of justice, transfer such action or appeal to any 

other such court . . . in which the action or appeal could have been brought.” 28 U.S.C. § 1631. 

Transfer under § 1631 can be initiated sua sponte. Brentwood Inv., LLC v. Stanley, No. 6:13-cv1635-Orl-22KRS, 2014 WL 12726559, at *4 (M.D. Fla. Feb. 19, 2014) (citing Trujillo v. Williams, 

465 F.3d 1210, 1222 (10th Cir. 2006)). 

Petitioner’s objections are largely incoherent and not relevant to the question of whether 

the Court has jurisdiction to consider his Petition. See generally Objs. Indeed, Petitioner does not 

specifically object to any of Magistrate Judge Reid’s findings or conclusions. See generally id. 

Accordingly, a de novo review of Magistrate Judge Reid’s R&R is not warranted because 

Petitioner does not make a “proper, specific objection” to any of Magistrate Judge Reid’s findings. 

See Macort, 208 F. App’x at 784. Therefore, the Court agrees with Magistrate Judge Reid’s 

finding that the Court does not have jurisdiction to consider the Petition. Moreover, the Court 

agrees with Magistrate Judge Reid’s recommendation that the Court transfer this matter to the 

Middle District of Alabama. 

Case 1:20-cv-23221-KMM Document 8 Entered on FLSD Docket 10/01/2020 Page 2 of 3
3 

UPON CONSIDERATION of the Petition, the R&R, the pertinent portions of the record, 

and being otherwise fully advised in the premises, it is hereby ORDERED AND ADJUDGED that 

the R&R (ECF No. 5) is ADOPTED. The Clerk of the Court is DIRECTED to TRANSFER this 

action to the United States District Court for the Middle District of Alabama. The Clerk of Court 

is instructed to CLOSE this case. All pending motions, if any, are DENIED AS MOOT. 

DONE AND ORDERED in Chambers at Miami, Florida, this ___ day of October, 2020. 

K. MICHAEL MOORE

CHIEF UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE

c: All counsel of record 

1st

Case 1:20-cv-23221-KMM Document 8 Entered on FLSD Docket 10/01/2020 Page 3 of 3