UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT DISTRICT OF MASSACHUSETTS

) ALEXANDER MICHAEL EVANS ) ) Petitioner, ) ) v. ) Civil Action No. 23-CV-11260-AK ) COLLIER COUNTY JAIL, ) ) Respondent. ) ) )

ORDER

A. KELLEY, D.J.

Alexander Michael Evans, who is representing himself in this matter, has filed a pleading in which it appears he is challenging his present custody at the Collier County Jail in Seminole, Florida. In his pleading, he “claim[s] [himself] as a sovereign citizen,” asserts that “all government officials are on notice of [his] citizen discharge,” and alleges that “the charges associated to the straw man is not [his] person.” [Dkt. #1]. He represents that he has a Social Security number, but that he “did not sign up for this contract.” Id. Evans states that he has “ask[ed] [his] kidnapper & commander under what law they are operating, the law of the sea or the law of the land.” Id. Because it appears that Evans is challenging the validity of his confinement, the Court construes the initiating pleading as a petition for writ of habeas corpus. See Muhammad v. Close,

(2004) (per curiam) (stating that “[c]hallenges to the validity of any confinement or to particulars affecting its duration are the province of habeas corpus”). However, “[d]istrict courts are limited to granting habeas relief ‘within their respective jurisdictions.’” Rumsfeld v. Padilla,

(2004) (quoting

(a)). Thus, unless a statute explicitly states otherwise, “for core habeas petitions challenging present physical confinement, jurisdiction lies in only one district: the district of confinement.”

. As Evans challenges his physical confinement in the Middle District of Florida, the Court

is without jurisdiction over the present petition. When a district court lacks jurisdiction over an action, it “shall, if it is in the interest of justice, transfer such action . . . to any other such court in which the action . . . could have been brought at the time it was filed.”

. Here, it is not in the interest of justice to transfer this action because Evans has not set forth a cognizable claim that his custody is in violation of federal law. Accordingly, the petition is DENIED and the action is DISMISSED for lack of jurisdiction. SO ORDERED. Dated: September 13, 2013 /s/ Angel Kelley Hon. Angel Kelley United States District Judge