Abuhouran v. Nicklin
764 F. Supp. 2d 130
D.D.C.2011Background
- Plaintiff Hitham Abuhouran, proceeding in forma pauperis, sues USP Canaan and FCI Fort Dix officials, the State Department, the United States, and a John Doe over alleged constitutional rights violations in Counts 1-9 and FOIA claims in Count 10.
- The bulk of the alleged events underlying Counts 1-9 occurred at USP Canaan and FCI Fort Dix, rendering DC venue improper for those counts.
- The court determines severance is required to avoid transferring a mixed-action with non-severable claims and thus severs Count 10 (FOIA) from Counts 1-9.
- Counts 1-9 are transferred to the Middle District of Pennsylvania, where the events occurred, to which venue is proper.
- The court dismisses the FOIA claims against individually named State Department officials as to those individuals, leaving only a FOIA claim against the State Department, which is the proper defendant in FOIA actions.
- The court explains that monetary damages are not available under FOIA, and invites the plaintiff to indicate whether he wishes to proceed with the FOIA action against the State Department.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Whether Counts 1-9 must be transferred to another district | Abuhouran argues venue is proper in DC under federal statute. | Defendants contend events occurred outside DC; venue improper in DC. | Counts 1-9 transferred to the Middle District of Pennsylvania. |
| Whether Counts 1-9 and Count 10 can be severed into separate actions | JOINDER of all claims should be retained for efficiency. | Counts are misjoined; severance appropriate to allow transfer. | Severed into two actions: prison action (Counts 1-9) and FOIA action (Count 10). |
| Whether FOIA claim against individual State Department officials may proceed | FOIA relief against all named defendants is sought. | FOIA only permits suit against a federal agency, not individuals. | FOIA claims against individuals dismissed; only the agency remains. |
| Whether monetary damages are available for FOIA claims | Plaintiff seeks monetary damages under FOIA. | FOIA does not provide monetary damages; only injunctive relief is possible. | Monetary damages not available; plaintiff invited to proceed with the FOIA action against the State Department only. |
Key Cases Cited
- Bederson v. United States, 756 F. Supp. 2d 38 (D.D.C. 2010) (severance and misjoinder standards in FOIA and related proceedings)
- In re Brand-Name Prescription Drugs Antitrust Litig., 264 F. Supp. 2d 1372 (J.P.M.L. 2003) (severance creates separate actions when appropriate)
- Montgomery v. STG Int'l, Inc., 532 F. Supp. 2d 29 (D.D.C. 2008) (Rule 20(a) joinder and misjoinder guidance)
- Disparte v. Corporate Exec. Bd., 223 F.R.D. 7 (D.D.C. 2004) (permissive joinder standards under Rule 20(a))
- Isasi v. Jones, 594 F. Supp. 2d 1 (D.D.C. 2009) (FOIA proper defendant and agency considerations)
- Barnes Group, Inc. v. Midwest Motor Supply Co., 2008 WL 509193 (S.D. Ohio 2008) (severance of claims prior to partial transfer under § 1406(a))
- Rogler v. U.S. Dept. of Health and Human Servs., 620 F. Supp. 2d 123 (D.D.C. 2009) (dismissal standards in in forma pauperis actions)