Prinzo v. United States Department of Health And Human Services
- Laura Swain
- 1:25-cv-06595
- U.S. District Court · Southern District of New York
- 3
In Prinzo v. HHS, Judge Swain transferred the action to Kentucky because the claims arose there.
Carmine James Prinzo’s case was moved from the Southern District of New York to the United States District Court for the Western District of Kentucky. HHS remains the defendant, and the Kentucky court will decide the pending fee and injunction matters.
What happened
In Prinzo v. United States Department of Health And Human Services, Carmine James Prinzo, representing himself, claimed that the agency violated the Administrative Procedure Act and his constitutional rights in connection with child-support proceedings in Louisville, Kentucky.
The court found no facts showing that New York was the proper place for the case. Because the events occurred in Jefferson County, Kentucky, the court transferred the action to the federal court for the Western District of Kentucky.
Judge Laura Taylor Swain ordered the transfer and closed the case in the Southern District of New York. The Kentucky court will decide pending matters, including fee and injunction requests; the New York court also denied fee-free status for any appeal.
The detailed version
- Prinzo v. United States Department of Health And Human Services · No. 1:25-cv-06595
- Laura Swain
- Aug. 13, 2025
Background
Carmine James Prinzo, proceeding without a lawyer, sued the United States Department of Health and Human Services (HHS). He alleged that HHS violated provisions of the Administrative Procedure Act and his constitutional rights in connection with child-support proceedings in Jefferson County Family Court in Louisville, Kentucky. Because of the constitutional allegations, the court treated the complaint as also asserting a claim under Bivens v. Six Unknown Fed. Narcotics Agents, a case recognizing a limited type of claim for certain constitutional violations by federal officials.
Venue analysis
The court considered the federal venue rules. Venue generally concerns the proper geographic federal court for a lawsuit. For the constitutional claim, the court applied 28 U.S.C. § 1391(b), including the rule allowing an action where a substantial part of the relevant events occurred. For the Administrative Procedure Act claim against HHS, the court applied 28 U.S.C. § 1391(e), including the rule allowing an action where a substantial part of the events or omissions occurred.
The court noted that Prinzo resides in Louisville and that the claims arose from child-support proceedings there. It stated that Prinzo alleged no facts showing why the Southern District of New York was a proper venue. Jefferson County is within the Western District of Kentucky.
Ruling
Under 28 U.S.C. § 1406(a), when a case is filed in the wrong venue, a court may dismiss it or, in the interest of justice, transfer it to a district where it could have been brought. The court transferred the action to the United States District Court for the Western District of Kentucky in the interest of justice. The order closes the case in the Southern District of New York; it does not dismiss the action.
The transferee court will decide all outstanding matters, including Prinzo’s application to proceed without prepaying fees and his motions for injunctive relief. The Southern District of New York directed that no summons issue from that court. It also certified that an appeal would not be taken in good faith and denied fee-free status for purposes of an appeal.
Read the full 3-page opinion on CourtListener, the free public archive maintained by the Free Law Project.