UDNIISTTERDI CSTT AOTFE MS ADSISSTARCIHCUT SCEOTUTRS T

) ADRIAN MAAS, ) ) Petitioner, ) ) v. ) Civil Action No. 24-cv-11388-LTS ) WARDEN OF FCI DANBURY, ) ) Respondent. ) )

ORDER

May 30, 2024

SOROKIN, D.J.

In this action, pro se petitioner Adrian Maas challenges the revocation of his placement in a Residential Reentry Center. Mass is incarcerated at FCI Danbury in Connecticut. District courts are limited to granting habeas relief ‘within their respective jurisdictions.’” Rumsfeld v. Padilla,

(2004) (quoting

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

. Here, Maas challenges his present physical confinement at a facility located within the District of Connecticut. Because Mass is not confined in the District of Massachusetts, the Court is without jurisdiction to provide habeas relief. Accordingly, the Court orders that this action be TRANSFERRED to the United States District Court for the District of Connecticut. See

(providing for transfer of an action to cure lack of jurisdiction). SO ORDERED. /s/ Leo T. Sorokin