Jin v. United States Citizenship and Immigration Services

Background

Mingxu Jin filed a self-represented action against United States Citizenship and Immigration Services (USCIS). He alleged that USCIS had failed to issue decisions on his applications for asylum and for withholding of removal. The court treated the complaint as seeking an order requiring government action under the federal mandamus statute, 28 U.S.C. § 1361, and additional or alternative relief under the Administrative Procedure Act.

The opinion states that Jin lives in Queens County, New York. He did not sue any individuals and did not identify where the events underlying his claims occurred. He listed a Bethpage, Nassau County, New York, address for USCIS. The claims did not involve real property.

Venue Analysis

Under 28 U.S.C. § 1391(e)(1), claims against federal agencies may generally be filed where the defendant resides, where a substantial part of the relevant events or omissions occurred, or, when real property is not involved, where the plaintiff resides. The court found that Jin had not shown that the Southern District of New York was a proper venue. It concluded that the Eastern District of New York was a proper venue because Jin resides in Queens County and the alleged events may have occurred in Nassau County; both counties are in the Eastern District of New York.

Ruling

Under 28 U.S.C. § 1406(a), when a case is filed in the wrong venue, a court may dismiss it or, when justice requires, transfer it to a district where it could have been filed. The court transferred the action to the United States District Court for the Eastern District of New York, describing that court as the only proper venue. The order directed the clerk to carry out the transfer.

The court also certified under 28 U.S.C. § 1915(a)(3) that any appeal from the order would not be taken in good faith. As a result, it denied fee-free status for an appeal. The opinion did not decide whether USCIS unlawfully delayed or failed to decide Jin’s applications.