Gilmore v. Ormond

Filing 9

ORDER adopting 6 Report and Recommendation and transferring this action to the United States District Court for the Eastern District of Kentucky. Signed by Honorable Joseph F Anderson, Jr on 10/13/2016. (mwal)

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
DISTRICT OF SOUTH CAROLINA

Tyganda Gilmore, #13255171,

)
)
Petitioner,
)
v.
)
)
J. Ray Ormond, Warden,
)
)
Respondent.
)
______________________________________ )

C/A No. 1:16-2743-JFA-SVH

ORDER

The pro se petitioner, Tyganda Gilmore, is an inmate at the United States Penitentiary
McCreary in Pine Knot, Kentucky. He brought this action pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 2241
challenging a detainer that is lodged against him in Richland County, South Carolina for
failure to pay child support. Specifically, the petitioner contends he moved under the
Interstate Agreement on Detainers (“IADA”) for a final disposition of his charges and that
the Richland County Solicitor failed to respond.
The Magistrate Judge assigned to this action1 has prepared a Report and
Recommendation and opines that this matter should be transferred to the United States
District Court for the Eastern District of Kentucky. The Report sets forth in detail the
relevant facts and standards of law on this matter, and the court incorporates such without

1

The Magistrate Judge’s review is made in accordance with 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1)(B) and Local Civil
Rule 73.02. The Magistrate Judge makes only a recommendation to this court. The recommendation has no
presumptive weight, and the responsibility to make a final determination remains with the court. Mathews
v. Weber, 423 U.S. 261 (1976). The court is charged with making a de novo determination of those portions
of the Report and Recommendation to which specific objection is made, and the court may accept, reject, or
modify, in whole or in part, the recommendation of the Magistrate Judge, or recommit the matter to the
Magistrate Judge with instructions. See 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1).

1

a recitation.
The petitioner filed timely objections to the Report. Therein, the petitioner essentially
states that he hopes that this court can transfer his petition to the correct district court.
In her Report, the Magistrate Judge correctly opines that this court lacks personal
jurisdiction over petitioner’s custodian/respondent, Warden Ormond in Kentucky. The
Magistrate Judge cites Rumsfeld v. Padilla, 542 U.S. 426 (2004) which explains that the
proper party respondent is generally the person who has the immediate custody of the party
detained.
After carefully reviewing the applicable laws, the record in this case, the Report and
Recommendation, and the petitioner’s response thereto, this court finds the Magistrate
Judge’s recommendation fairly and accurately summarizes the facts and applies the correct
principles of law and it is incorporated herein by reference.
Accordingly, the Clerk is authorized to transfer this action to the United States District
Court for the Eastern District of Kentucky.
IT IS SO ORDERED.

October 13, 2016
Columbia, South Carolina

Joseph F. Anderson, Jr.
United States District Judge

2