IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

FOR THE

MIDDLE DISTRICT OF PENNSYLVANIA

JAIME MENESES MENA, :

:

Petitioner :

:

v. : CIVIL NO. 4:CV-15-768

:

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, : (Judge Brann)

:

Respondent :

MEMORANDUM

April 28, 2015

Background

Jaime Meneses Mena, an inmate presently confined at the Moshannon

Valley Correctional Institution, Philipsburg, Pennsylvania (Moshannon Valley)

filed this pro se action which will be construed as seeking habeas corpus relief

under 28 U.S.C. § 2241.1

 Petitioner has neither filed an in forma pauperis

application nor paid the required filing fee. 

1

 Habeas corpus review under § 2241 “allows a federal prisoner to challenge

the ‘execution’ of his sentence.” Woodall v. Federal Bureau of Prisons, 432 F.3d 235,

241 (3d Cir. 2005). Review is available “where the deprivation of rights is such that it

necessarily impacts the fact or length of detention.” Leamer v. Fauver, 288 F.3d 532,

540 (3d Cir. 2002).

1

Case 4:15-cv-00768-MWB-JVW Document 3 Filed 04/28/15 Page 1 of 3
Named as sole Respondent is the United States of America.2

 Petitioner

indicates that he is a non-violent offender presently serving a federal criminal

sentence. The pending action does not challenge the legality of Petitioner’s 

federal criminal conviction or resulting sentence. 

Rather, Mena states that he is willing to waive his right to a deportation

hearing prior to the completion of his sentence. See Doc. 1, ¶ 2. As relief,

Petitioner requests only that he be immediately deported without having to finish

serving the remainder of his federal sentence. For the reasons outlined below,

Mena’s action will be transferred to the United States District Court for the

Western District of Pennsylvania.

Discussion

Actions seeking relief pursuant to § 2241 may only be sought in the district

court having jurisdiction over a petitioner’s custodian. See Rumsfeld v. Padilla,

542 U.S. 426, 442 (2004)(jurisdiction for habeas corpus petitions challenging

present physical confinement lies in only one district; the district of confinement);

Braden v. 30th Judicial Circuit Court, 410 U.S. 484, 494-95 (1973). 

Although having a mailing address as Philipsburg, Pennsylvania, which is

2

 The only properly named Respondent in a federal habeas corpus action is

Petitioner’s custodial official, in this case the Moshannon Valley Warden. See 28

U.S.C. § 2242. 

2

Case 4:15-cv-00768-MWB-JVW Document 3 Filed 04/28/15 Page 2 of 3
located in Centre County and within the confines of the Middle District of

Pennsylvania, Moshannon Valley Correctional Center is actually located in

Decatur Township, Clearfield County, Pennsylvania, which is within the

jurisdiction of the United States District Court for the Western District of

Pennsylvania. See Tsoukalas v. United States, 215 Fed. Appx. 152 (3d Cir.

2007)(jurisdiction over a § 2241 petition filed by Moshannon Valley inmate rests

with the United States District Court for the Western District of Pennsylvania).

Pursuant to Tsoukalas, this Court lacks jurisdiction over the Warden of

Moshannon Valley. However, a court may transfer any civil action for the

convenience of the parties or witnesses, or in the interest of justice, to any district

where the action might have been brought. 28 U.S.C. § 1404(a). Consequently,

this matter will be transferred to the United States District Court for the Western

District of Pennsylvania pursuant to § 1404(a). An appropriate Order will enter.

BY THE COURT:

 s/ Matthew W. Brann 

Matthew W. Brann

United States District Judge

3

Case 4:15-cv-00768-MWB-JVW Document 3 Filed 04/28/15 Page 3 of 3