1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 9 FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA 10 11 JOSE RANGEL, Case No. 2:22-cv-00021-JDP (HC) 12 Plaintiff, ORDER TRANSFERRING CASE TO THE McALLEN DIVISION OF THE UNITED 13 v. STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF TEXAS 14 PAUL THOMPSON, 15 Defendants. 16 17 Plaintiff, a federal prisoner proceeding pro se, has filed a habeas petition. Therein, he 18 alleges that he should be immediately released because his conviction is based on a faulty 19 indictment. ECF No. 1 at 3-4. The indictment and conviction stem from proceedings in the 20 McAllen Division of the United States District Court for the Southern District of Texas. Id. at 3. 21 An attack on the validity of a conviction should be brought in the court of conviction. See 22 Hernandez v. Campbell,

(9th Cir. 2000) (“Generally, motions to contest 23 the legality of a sentence must be filed under § 2255 in the sentencing court, while petitions that 24 challenge the manner, location, or conditions of a sentence’s execution must be brought pursuant 25 to § 2241 in the custodial court.”). Here, petitioner argues that he should be released because he 26 was not charged in a timely indictment. ECF No. 1 at 1. That attack on the validity of his 27 conviction should be brought in Texas. 28 1 Pursuant to Local Rule 120(f), a civil action which has not been commenced in the proper 2 | division of a court may, on the court’s own motion, be transferred to the proper division of the 3 | court. Therefore, this action will be transferred to the McAllen Division of the United States 4 | District Court of the Southern District of Texas. 5 Good cause appearing, it is hereby ORDERED that this action is transferred to the United 6 | States District Court for the Southern District of Texas sitting in McAllen. 7 g IT IS SO ORDERED.

Dated: _ May 21, 2022 10 JEREMY D. PETERSON i UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE

12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28