UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA SOUTHERN POVERTY LAW CENTER, Plaintiff, v. Civil Action No. 18-760 (CKK) U.S. DEPARTMENT OF HOMELAND SECURITY, et al., Defendants. MEMORANDUM OPINION (May 10, 2019) Currently pending before the Court is Defendants’ [47] Motion to Sever and Transfer Venue. Upon consideration of the briefing, 1 the relevant authorities, and the record as a whole, that motion is DENIED. In an exercise of its discretion, the Court decides not to sever the claims in this case into three separate cases. The Court also decides that the interests of justice do not warrant transfer of the unsevered case to a different forum. This case concerns immigrants’ access to counsel in three separate detention facilities. To briefly summarize Defendants’ two-pronged motion, they first ask to sever the claims in the [57] First Amended Complaint into three separate cases corresponding to the respective facilities. 2 Then Defendants would have the Court transfer the respective cases as follows: the case involving LaSalle Detention Facility, in Jena, Louisiana, to the Western District of Louisiana; that regarding Irwin County Detention Center in Ocilla, 1 The Court’s consideration has focused on the following documents: • Mem. of P&A in Supp. of Defs.’ Mot. to Sever and Transfer Venue, ECF No. 47-1 (“Defs.’ Mem.”); • Pl.’s Resp. in Opp’n to Defs.’ Mot. to Sever and Transfer Venue, ECF No. 50 (“Pl.’s Opp’n”); • Defs.’ Resp. to Pl.’s Mot. for Leave to File Am. Compl. and Reply to Defs.’ Mot. to Sever and Transfer Venue, ECF No. 54 (“Def.’s Reply”); and • Pl.’s Sur-Reply in Opp’n to Defs.’ Mot. to Sever and Transfer Venue, ECF No. 58 (“Pl.’s Sur-Reply”). 2 In response to the parties’ joint request, the Court permitted the filing of the First Amended Complaint partway through the briefing of the presently pending motion. See Min. Order of Oct. 31, 2018. Each side has had an opportunity to address arguments premised on the currently operative complaint. 1 Georgia, to the Middle District of Georgia, Valdosta Division; and that concerning Stewart Detention Facility in Lumpkin, Georgia, to the Middle District of Georgia, Columbus Division. The main reason that Plaintiffs oppose the severance and transfer is their insistence that this case is about Defendants’ administration of detention policies—in particular, the Performance Based National Detention Standards (“PBNDS”)—that apply to all three facilities. Those Defendants are predominantly located in this jurisdiction. The Court’s discretion to sever claims into separate lawsuits springs from Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 21, which permits severance of “any claim against a party.” Fed. R. Civ. P. 21; see also M.M.M. on behalf of J.M.A. v. Sessions, 319 F. Supp. 3d 290, 295 (D.D.C. 2018). “In making this determination, courts consider multiple factors, including: (1) whether the claims arise out of the same transaction or occurrence; (2) whether the claims present common questions of law or fact; (3) concerns related to judicial economy, multiplicity of litigation, and orderly and efficient resolution of disputes; (4) the availability of witnesses and other ...
Original document
Source: All recent Immigration Decisions In All the U.S. Courts of Appeals