Truong v. Petrucci

Background

Peter Truong filed a petition under 28 U.S.C. § 2241, a federal law allowing a person in custody to challenge certain aspects of that custody. The petition alleged that denying him access to the TRULINCS system at the Federal Correctional Institution Otisville violated the United States Constitution and several federal laws. Truong asked the court to order James Petrucci, the Acting Warden at Otisville, to rescind the restrictions.

Truong was transferred from Otisville to the Federal Correctional Institution Oklahoma City on October 8, 2019. He later notified the court that he was at the Federal Correctional Institution San Pedro, which is in the Central District of California. The opinion states that neither party said Truong was being denied TRULINCS access at San Pedro.

Analysis

The court explained that a claim becomes moot when the person bringing it no longer has an actual injury that a favorable decision could remedy. It also explained that an inmate’s transfer generally makes an injunction concerning the former facility moot. Although a court may retain jurisdiction when the government transfers a petitioner after a properly filed § 2241 petition, that rule did not apply to a new alleged injury at San Pedro.

The court therefore concluded that Truong’s transfer from Otisville eliminated the injury addressed by his petition. It further stated that a new petition concerning San Pedro would present a new alleged injury, over which the Southern District of New York would lack personal jurisdiction and for which venue there would be improper.

Ruling

Judge Lorna G. Schofield ordered that the petition be dismissed as moot. The court directed the Clerk of Court to close the matter and ensure that Truong received the order at his current address. The court also stated that, if Truong sought to file a new § 2241 petition based on San Pedro’s refusal to provide TRULINCS access, he should file it in the Central District of California and name the San Pedro warden as respondent.