Sirfuentes, III v. CITIBANK, N.A.
- Laura Swain
- 1:25-cv-04786
- U.S. District Court · Southern District of New York
- 3
In Sirfuentes v. Citibank, Judge Swain transferred the case from New York to Michigan because venue was improper in New York.
The transfer affects David Angel Sirfuentes, III and Citibank, N.A. The case will proceed, if allowed by the transferee court, in the United States District Court for the Western District of Michigan rather than the Southern District of New York.
What happened
In Sirfuentes, III v. CITIBANK, N.A., David Angel Sirfuentes, III, representing himself, claimed that Citibank violated the Fair Credit Reporting Act and state laws. He said he experienced the alleged injuries at his residence in Grand Rapids, Michigan.
The court found that the Southern District of New York was not shown to be a proper venue because the complaint did not allege that the events occurred there or that Citibank was subject to personal jurisdiction there for this action. The court concluded that venue was proper in the Western District of Michigan, where Grand Rapids is located.
Judge Laura Taylor Swain ordered the case transferred to the Western District of Michigan under the federal venue-transfer statute. The New York court closed its case, stated that the transferee court would decide whether Sirfuentes could proceed without paying fees, and denied fee-free status for any appeal from the order.
The detailed version
- Sirfuentes, III v. CITIBANK, N.A. · No. 1:25-cv-04786
- Laura Swain
- July 21, 2025
Background
David Angel Sirfuentes, III, proceeding without a lawyer, sued Citibank, N.A. He alleged violations of the Fair Credit Reporting Act and various state laws. The opinion states that Sirfuentes resides in Grand Rapids, Michigan, and that he alleged experiencing the injuries at that residence.
Venue analysis
The court applied the general federal venue statute, 28 U.S.C. § 1391. That statute allows a civil action to proceed in certain districts, including a district where a substantial part of the events or omissions giving rise to the claims occurred.
Sirfuentes alleged that Citibank maintained a principal place of business in New York, New York and conducted substantial business in the Southern District of New York. The court noted, however, that Citibank’s main office listed on its federal charter is in South Dakota. The court also found that Sirfuentes alleged no facts suggesting that Citibank engaged in acts giving rise to his claims at its office in the Southern District of New York, or that Citibank was subject to personal jurisdiction there for this action.
Because Sirfuentes alleged that the harm occurred at his residence in Grand Rapids, the court determined that venue was proper in the Western District of Michigan, which includes Kent County. Under 28 U.S.C. § 1406(a), a court may transfer a case filed in the wrong venue when transferring it is in the interest of justice.
Ruling
Judge Laura Taylor Swain ordered the Clerk of Court to transfer the action to the United States District Court for the Western District of Michigan. The order states that the New York court’s case was closed and that a summons would not issue from that court. It left the decision about whether Sirfuentes could proceed without prepaying fees to the transferee court. The court also certified that an appeal would not be taken in good faith and denied fee-free status for purposes of an appeal.
The court transferred the case based on venue and did not decide the merits of the Fair Credit Reporting Act or state-law claims.
Read the full 3-page opinion on CourtListener, the free public archive maintained by the Free Law Project.