Case Information
*1 Case 2:16-cv-01151-GMN-NJK Document 2 Filed 05/26/16 Page 1 of 2 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT DISTRICT OF NEVADA FREDERICK BANKS,
Petitioner, Case No. 2:16-cv-01151-GMN-NJK vs. ORDER
MARK HORNAK, et al.,
Respondents.
Petitioner is in custody at FCI Butner, in North Carolina. [1] He has filed an application to
proceed in forma pauperis (ECF No.1) and a petition for a writ of habeas corpus pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 2241. The court will dismiss this action.
If petitioner is not attacking his sentence, then the correct respondent is the warden of the prison where petitioner is held. 28 U.S.C. § 2242. The correct district court in which petitioner should file the petition is the district court where the warden is located. 28 U.S.C. § 2241(a). In this case, it would be the United States District Court for the Eastern District of North Carolina. If the petition could be construed as a motion attacking petitioner’s sentence, then petitioner would need to file the motion in the court where he was convicted. 28 U.S.C. § 2255(a). Based upon the name of the first respondent, the Honorable Mark Hornak, that court would be the United States District Court for the Western District of Pennsylvania.
*2 Case 2:16-cv-01151-GMN-NJK Document 2 Filed 05/26/16 Page 2 of 2 The court will not transfer this action to either of those two courts. First, the petition is so vague that the court cannot determine whether it should be a petition under § 2241 or a motion under § 2255, and thus the court cannot determine which court would be the correct court. Second, even if it was clear which court was the correct court, it still would not be in the interests of justice to transfer a vague petition to that court. Petitioner needs to compose a clear, concise petition or motion and file it in that court.
Reasonable jurists would not find the court’s conclusions to be debatable or wrong, and the court will not issue a certificate of appealability.
IT IS THEREFORE ORDERED that the application to proceed in forma pauperis (ECF No. 1) is DENIED .
IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that this action is DISMISSED . The clerk of the court shall enter judgment accordingly and close this action.
IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that a certificate of appealability is DENIED .
DATED:
_________________________________ Gloria M. Navarro, Chief Judge United States District Court -2-
[1] The court obtained that information on-line. Petitioner has given his address as the offices 28 of the Federal Bureau of Prisons in Washington, DC.