Amuneke-Nze v. Ezell
- Laura Swain
- 1:25-cv-02854
- U.S. District Court · Southern District of New York
- 3
In Amuneke-Nze v. Ezell, Judge Swain transferred the mandamus action to the District of Columbia because New York was the wrong venue.
The transfer affects Uchechi Amuneke-Nze’s case against Charles Ezell and the U.S. Office of Personnel Management by moving it from the Southern District of New York to the District of Columbia. The New York court’s order also denied fee-free status for an appeal.
What happened
In Amuneke-Nze v. Ezell, Uchechi Amuneke-Nze, representing herself, asked the court to stop the U.S. Office of Personnel Management from finalizing a proposed federal-workforce rule until required public notice and comment procedures were followed. She also named Acting OPM Director Charles Ezell as a respondent.
The court concluded that the Southern District of New York was not a proper place for the case. OPM is located in the District of Columbia, the challenged events concerned OPM's operations there, and Amuneke-Nze resides in a Texas county within the Northern District of Texas. Both the District of Columbia and the Northern District of Texas could hear the case.
Under the federal venue law, Judge Laura Taylor Swain transferred the action to the U.S. District Court for the District of Columbia because doing so served the interests of justice. The New York court closed the action there, did not issue a summons, left any decision about proceeding without paying filing fees to the receiving court, and denied fee-free status for an appeal from this order.
The detailed version
- Amuneke-Nze v. Ezell · No. 1:25-cv-02854
- Laura Swain
- Apr. 15, 2025
Background
Uchechi Amuneke-Nze filed a pro se emergency action seeking mandamus relief under 28 U.S.C. § 1361. Mandamus is a court order directing a government official or agency to perform a required duty. She asked the court to prevent the U.S. Office of Personnel Management (OPM) from issuing or finalizing the draft rule titled “Suitability and Fitness of the Federal Workforce,” or a materially similar rule, until the respondents complied with notice-and-comment requirements. She named OPM and Charles Ezell, identified as OPM’s Acting Director, as respondents.
Venue analysis
The court applied 28 U.S.C. § 1391(e)(1), which provides venue rules for civil actions against federal officers and agencies. Such an action may be brought where a defendant resides, where a substantial part of the events or omissions occurred, or, if no real property is involved, where the plaintiff resides.
The court determined that the Southern District of New York was not a proper venue. From the petition, neither respondent appeared to reside in a county within that district. The court also found that the events underlying the petition did not occur there. OPM is located in the District of Columbia, and the challenged Executive Order concerned OPM’s operations. The court therefore identified the District of Columbia as a proper venue based on the respondent’s location and the events involved. Because the case did not involve real property and Amuneke-Nze resides in Tarrant County, Texas, the Northern District of Texas was also a proper venue.
Disposition
Under 28 U.S.C. § 1406(a), when a case is filed in the wrong venue, the court may dismiss it or, in the interest of justice, transfer it to a district where it could have been brought. The court transferred this action to the United States District Court for the District of Columbia because the petition challenged an Executive Order concerning OPM’s operations.
The court directed the Clerk to transfer the action and stated that the New York action was closed. It did not issue a summons. Whether Amuneke-Nze could proceed without prepaying filing fees was left for the District of Columbia court to decide. The court also certified that an appeal would not be taken in good faith and denied fee-free status for purposes of an appeal. Judge Laura Taylor Swain signed the order.
Read the full 3-page opinion on CourtListener, the free public archive maintained by the Free Law Project.